consequences. and that it certainly would not strengthen medicare. mr. president, you see, the law drains $380 billion from a very, very well-received medicare advantage program. stories from nebraskans illustrate how these cuts are hurting senior citizens. i heard from a couple in carney, nebraska. they wrote to me saying that the medicare advantage plan they had for several years was something that they really liked. it was a plan that worked for them. but that plan, because of obamacare, was canceled. she went on to say to me that another plan was going to cost more money, higher rates were coming for them. she went on to say -- and i'm quoting -- "i've not been shy about telling people that we

lost our insurance plan, thanks to obamacare." unquote. i could add to that that she has lost her insurance plan and thousands of others, tens of thousands of others across of united states have because of the votes of the majority and the president. a nebraskan from hastings shared that her medicare advantage plan was discontinued and her new medicare advantage plan option was -- get this -- 357% more expensive. is that fair treatment to that senior citizen? you see, when obamacare was passed, we tried to get amendments done that if there was any savings in compare, it would go back to medicare to protect the system. shows were voted down by the

majority. so what we ended up with is a situation where those funds were pulled out of medicare and used to finance obamacare. for millions of americans and about 35,000 nebraskans who rely upon medicare advantage, this law has not delivered on its promises. as i've said over and over again since this debate began, i am committed to ensuring that medicare is sustainable for decades to come not only for the current generation, but for our children and our grandchildren. the health care law does not accomplish this goal, and i believe strongly it needs to be repealed. mr. president, i yield the floor.

the presiding officer: the senator from wyoming. mr. barrasso: thank you, mr. president. i come to the floor also to talk about a letter i got from wyoming from a constituent, tracy, lives in rock springs, wyoming; very concerned about the health care law. and it's interesting because she writes after hearing on the news last week a clip of secretary sebelius, and it's a clip where secretary sebelius claims there is no indication that the a.c.a. is responsible for any job loss. so tracy in rock springs, wyoming, sees secretary sebelius on television and wants to let the country know -- and i am doing that for tracy today -- that the secretary is wrong, she says, and she says my life -- her life, tracy's life, is a prime example. she says let me explain just how the a.c.a. has destroyed my life.

now the quote she is referencing is secretary sebelius last week saying there is absolutely no evidence and every economist will tell you, this is secretary sebelius saying that there is any job loss related to the affordable care act. it almost seems like a deliberate deception to mislead the american people saying who are you going to believe? secretary sebelius or your own two jobs. that is why tracy wrote to me. she says she works. she maintains a part-time job. she has a master's degree. she said once the a.c.a. was passed, she said, "i saw the writing on the wall and so do the companies i work for." isn't it interesting, mr. president, that tracy in rock springs, wyoming, could see the writing on the wall, the companies she works for could see the writing on the wall. and yet the democrats in this

body who voted for this law couldn't see the writing on the wall. she said she had health insurance and that these companies wouldn't have had to provide her with anything because she had insurance. wouldn't have had to provide her with anything. but they didn't know who might and might not have insurance, and they weren't taking the chance that they would have to offer health care to a large number of people. so what these companies basically did, she said, was hire a specific number of individuals full-time, and thus, those of us who remained part-time employees have been cut way back. well, this is obviously impacting her wages, her take-home pay, the things that matter to her. and it seems that democrats, including secretary sebelius, couldn't care less. it was interesting, i came to the floor yesterday with an article from "the new york times" last week about all of

these public jobs, people working for public schools, people working community colleges, sanitation workers for communities, for counties, all of these people having their hours cut, their take-home pay cut, their wages cut. and it's because of the health care law. specifically because of the health care law. so tracy goes on to say, she says, "i can't believe in a country my grandfather came to and lived the american dream is actually actively trying to prevent me from being able to do the work i want to do. the kind of work i am good at, the kind of work that others benefit from. what was the comment last week about how i'm being liberated from my job to do what i truly want?" it is astonishing, mr. president. what she says is i was doing what i truly wanted. but yet, according to the

democrats, according to nancy pelosi, the former speaker of the house, she's not being liberated from the job to do what she truly wants to do when you have somebody with a master's degree, someone who loves to teach -- loves to teach -- now not being able to do what she truly wants to do. and now this government is actually preventing me, she says, from doing what i want to do, doing what i like to do, doing what i am meant to do. this is a woman in wyoming doing what she wants to do, what she likes to do, what she wants to do and was meant to do as a teacher because of this health care law. and it's not just in wyoming. i read a story on the floor yesterday of a school district in connecticut, meridan, connecticut, where the superintendent on a national

board of school districts said what am i supposed to do? i have to, if i'm going to provide by law all of these part-time workers who are working over 31 hours health insurance, what i'm going to have to do is fire five reading teachers. how can i make that decision and that trade-off? instead they cut the hours to less than 30 hours per week. yet, kathleen sebelius has absolutely no evidence that there is any job loss related to the affordable care act. so my friend tracy writes, "so obamacare has cost me a lot of jobs, has cost me about half of my income." when the president of the united states is saying we need to raise the minimum wage, why is the president of the united states ignoring tracy and her income and her wages and her take-home pay? why is his health care law making her life worse? she said since obamacare has cost me a lot of jobs, half of my income -- and, by the way, she said i was one of those

taxpayers that don't have any deductions to take generally other than my home mortgage. so when you used to get a lot of taxes from me by decreasing my income in half, that your tax revenue is decreasing as well. so next time secretary sebelius claims there are no indications of any job loss, you can tell her that i have lost multiple jobs and i am not being liberated. that's what the american people are facing mr. president. that is what the president of the united states denies every day when he refuses to give voice to the suffering that his health care law is causing all across this country in all 50 states, and it's time that we work together and get solutions for the health care needs of this country and not continue under what is happening with the president's health care law, which case after case after case is not giving the american people what he promises them; is

giving them a lot worse and is hurting their lives, is hurting their health and is hurting their take-home pay. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the republican whip. mr. cornyn: mr. president, i thank the senator from wyoming, who is one of the most knowledgeable and eloquent members on our side of the aisle, or in this chamber on the subject of health care law, being a former practicing orthopedic surgeon, he knows the subject almost better than anyone i know. but we're here on the floor today to talk about the cuts to the only real choice that seniors have when it comes to their health care coverage under medicare. you basically have two choices. one is called medicare advantage, which i'll talk more about in a minute. and the other is medicare -- traditional medicare, which is a

fee-for-service program that many people find is less advantageous to them than medicare advantage. close to 16 million people currently receive health care benefits through medicare advantage. about a million of them in texas, the state i'm honored to represent. and, of course, they represent roughly 30% of all medicare beneficiaries. why would somebody choose medicare advantage rather than traditional medicare? well, because it gives a lot more flexibility and greater patient choice and it actually delivers better results than traditional medicare. it's been one of the main sources of innovation when it comes to health care producing better outcomes for seniors under medicare. that's been -- medicare advantage is the primary driver. unfortunately, the president's health care law, known as the affordable care act, or obamacare, slashed about $300

billion from medicare advantage, and my constituents are already going to start to see premium increases to their medicare advantage policies, and many of them will have to then question whether they can afford that and whether they will drop medicare advantage and lose the choices and the flexibility and the innovation that goes along with it, and end up basically turning to traditional medicare fee-for-service. in texas about two out of every three doctors will see a new medicare patient, because it actually reimburses physicians at a lower rate than many health care insurance does, many have to lower their practice. we know billions of dollars that has been taken from medicare advantage and these seniors who rely on it to shore up the

affordable care act or obamacare, we know that the news on obamacare continues to unwind and bring us bad news almost every day. not only have millions of people lost their existing health care coverage even though they were promised by the president of the united states that if you like it, you can keep it. i lost count of how many times the president made that statement but i think it's somewhere in the high 20's. now we're finding out that more and more people are having to pay higher premiums as a result of obamacare. this is another promise the president made. he said that a family of four would see a reduction of $2,500 in their average premiums. but they're seeing their premiums go up. indeed on friday in a late afternoon news dump that has become a new art form for the administration, their dump news on friday afternoon and hope nobody notices or it won't be

covered. we learned roughly two-thirds of the people who work for small businesses will see an increase in their premiums as a result of obama. some 11 million small business employees. so the people who are concerned about medicare advantage aren't just on this side of the aisle. in fact, we've had bipartisan accolades for medicare advantage, called a great success by senators from, both senators from new york, for example, and the chairman of the democrat senatorial campaign committee from colorado. they recently joined me along with a couple other dozen colleagues to urge the c.m.s. administrator, marilyn tavenner, to -- quote -- "maintain payment levels that will allow medicare advantage beneficiaries to be protected from disruptive changes in 2015." close quote. so this bipartisan support for this important choice for seniors, known as medicare advantage, is in real jeopardy,

as they're going to see as a result of the $300 billion cut from medicare advantage in order to shore up this failing experiment in big government known as obamacare, people's existing health care arrangements are in serious jeopardy and they're concerned. and they're calling us and writing us and wanting to know what we're going to do. unfortunately, those calls and those letters seem to fall on deaf ears as far as the president and the people who voted for this bill, because they seem just -- they're whistling past the graveyard hoping that what will likely happen in november, which will finally be that day of electoral accountability, when the american people's voice will actually be heard. mr. president, i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president?

the presiding officer: the senator from nebraska. mrs. fischer: thank you, mr. president. i rise today to speak on behalf of the nebraska senior citizens who arwho are enrolled in medice advantage these nebraskans are going to face decreased benefits because of obamacare's latest cuts. i am concerned about how these cuts will impact rural nebraskans who may be forced out of the program altogether due to the lack of available plans. the administration has already taken over $700 billion from medicare to prop up obamacare. $308 billion of that is from the popular medicare advantage program to fund this failed health care experiment. these cuts to health services for seniors only hasten the demise of this successful program, a program that has improved the lives of millions

of seniors across this great country. medicare advantage works for them. too many promises have already been made and broken, so let's not break another promise to america's seniors. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor. mr. coats: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from indiana. mr. coats: mr. president, i think nearly every member of this body shares the goal of increasing access to affordable health insurance and helping american families receive the best coverage to meet their specific needs. so the question before us today and the question before us this entire congress has been, how are these goals being achieved? this really has been an issue we have been debating since 2010

when the president -- when president obama's health care law was enacted. well, i can tell you, based on the extraordinary level of fee feedback from hoosiers, regardless of party affiliation or ideology, whether republicans or democrats or independents or libertarians or where every it s coming from, the overwhelming messages that have been sent to me'me as i've heard traveling across the state of indiana, as i have read in the e-mails, hundreds of thousands of emaicialtion and phone-mailse- g these goals. it is hurting more families thank it is helping and -- than it is helping and to top it all

of course, the administration late friday afternoon, i think in hopes not too many would notice, cuts again one of the most popular programs available to seniors: medicare advantage. we have 230,000 who i hoosiers enrolled in medicare advantage plans, and they're being told that major cuts will be made in their plans, in what is proposed in their plans, and premiums will increase in their plans in order to pay for the rest of obamacare. what an irony here. we pass a program to provide health care coverage for senior citizens. they sign up for the program. they make the choice on their own to pay more for medicare advantage so they get better coverage, and the administration simply says, well, we need to rebalance things out and so we're going to do everything we possibly can to make it more

difficult and more expsive to join medicare advantage -- their choice. instead, they're saying, we're going to make it our choice that this program is going to be reduced and much harder to engage in. consider what's happening here. this administration is cutting billions of dollars from medicare advantage, an extremely popular program -- not just in my state but across this country -- to pay for the obamacare plan, which is extremely unpopular. so you take a plan that works, you take a plan that people support because it's their choice, are willing to pay for it, and you say, no, we're going to take thatway from you so that we can -- that away from you so that we can cover the cost for plan that is not pap already a. it is just -- that is not popular. it is just the irony of ironies that of a goal that all of us wo

meet. so here we have another broken promise. the president saying so famously over and over again, if you like your plan, ub keep it. if you make a choice as to how you want to be covered, what benefits you want to have, what premium you want to pay, you can keep it. turning around now and saying, well, no, effectively, you can't keep it because we're going to take that away from you. so it's no wonder that i receive the hundreds, if not thousands -- tens of thousands of feedback from who i hoosiers all across y state basically saying, i got duped here. i got lured into something that supposedly was going to make medical care less costly and that i would be able to keep my doctor, i would be able to stay with my hospital, i would be able to keep the benefits in the plan that i chose and now i'm

being told that, no, none of that is going to wonch work. now, as was just state th just y senator cornyn from texas, mr. president, there's bipartisan effort under way to send you the message to not take this moneyway from medicare advantage -- this money away from medicare advantage and not mitigate or decrease the incentive to join medicare advantage. so i know, mr. president, you don't want to listen to republicans and have them tell you what they think is happening in their state, what they believe is happening in their state, what they think their suggestion as to what we ought to do to try to fix this disaster of a health care plan, but why don't you listen to your own members. there are a significant number of democrats that have said, we don't want these cuts to be imposed on medicare advantage. we don't want to go home and tell our people they can't any longer have their medicare

advantage plan. so if you don't want to listen to us, i fully understand that. you've made that very clear. why don't you listen to your own members and thereon what they're saying -- and listen to what they're saying and let's try to fix this thing or repair that thing, to the extent we can, and give people the ability to make those choices and to participate and keep the plan that they have chosen and not have it takenway by a bureaucracy that simply -- takennen away by a bureaucracy that simply makes decisions for them. with that, i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from utah. mr. hatch: i compliment my colleagues who have been talking about medicare advantage today. it is amazing to me that they'll take money from medicare advantage, this administration, and put it into -- that people love, that works well, where they can have their own doctors and their own health care providers, and put it into obamacare, that is not working, and they're not happy with, and we wind up with a lot of

dissatisfied people in this country and with good reason for their dissatisfaction. so i rise today to join my colleagues in speaking out against the harm obamacare is already causing to seniors throughout the country who rely on medicare advantage. i've heard from many seniors in my home state of utah who are worried about the impact of further cuts to the medicare advantage program could have on their personal health care. for example, james and maureen of spanish fork, utah, sent me a letter describing how they have been personally affected by the hundreds of billions of dollars taken from medicare advantage to pay for obamacare. to take money from a program that really works, that people are happy with, that they pay for and put it into obamacare where it doesn't work, they're not happy with it and it even costs more -- more expensive to the government. james and maureen were informed

some time ago that their current doctors and most providers in their area will no longer be covered as a part of their plans network. -- of their plan's network. in maureen's words, "if further fund something taken from advantage plans, more and more providers will stop accepting these plans. where will we go to seek medical treatment?" maureen also said that, like many other seniors, she and her husband worry about what will be next. these are common stories, mr. president. seniors throughout utah and throughout the nation are seeing their health care options dwindle because president obama and the democrats in congress raided medicare advantage to pay for their misguided obamacare, what they call their health law. now, we all remember when the president promised that under obamacare, if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. yet because of the law's cuts to

medicare advantage, people like james and maureen are being forged to find new doctors -- forced to find new doctors and health care providers. as each day passes, fewer and fewer options are available to them. this is just another example of broken promises that became part and parcel of obamacare. on top of the problems with medicare advantage, a new report issued late last week from the chief actuary at the centers for medicare and medicaid services, with even more troubling news. buried in the report, which was two years late, by the way, is the confirmation that obamacare will raise insurance premiums for 11 million employees of small businesses. you heard that right, mr. president. the obama administration's own actuary found that under the president's health law, 11 million workers will see their premiums rise. like i said, this report was two

years late, and it's no wonder why the administration sat on it for as long as they did. this is just the latest in a long line of bad data that we've seen about this misguided law. yet the administration refuses to step away from its talkingpoints and acknowledge the truth: that the health law is fundamentally flawed and is not working as promised. all of the problems we're seeing are just coming over and over again. the best path afford would be to repeal obamacare and replace it with patient-focused, commonsense reforms that will actually lower costs and expand options for the american people. i hope eventually that that's the path we take. mr. president, i yield the floor. mr. thune: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from south dablg. -- from south

dakota. mr. thune: in july of 2009, president obama said, if you like your doctor, you can keep yew doctor. if you like your current insurance, u you can keep that insurance, period, end of story. later in september of 2009, the president said, "now these steps" -- talking about obamacare -- "will ensure that you, america's seniors, get the benefitbenefits that you've been promised." last friday we saw yet another group of americans fall victim to the democrats' broken obamacare promises. and this time it was america's seniors. become bucobamacare cuts of ove0 billion are already hurting seniors who rely on that popular program for their health care needs. more than than 15 million senio, close to about 30% of all medicare recipients, are enrolled in medicare advantage plans. "the wall street journal" reports that approximately one out of every two new medicare

enrollees chooses medicare advantage. seniors often choose medicare advantage because it is a more comprehensive and cohesive way to get health care services, and it offers seniors the chance to pick a plan that's right for them instead of a one-size-fits-all approach picked for them by washington, d.c. the administration's additional cuts to medicare advantage announced last week will make it even harder for america's seniors to keep their benefits plan and preferred doctor. the kaiser family foundation estimates that more than half a million seniors will lose their current plans in 2014, which is a direct violation of the president's promise. this administration's cut to medicare advantage in order to try to pay for obamacare having real-world impacts on people throughout the country. a constituent of mine, sheryl from box elder, south dakota, wrote to me this past week, "my husband and i both pay for a

medicare advantage plan. we've already had our original policy canceled because of obamacare and our prescription costs have increased for the same reason. so i am practically begging to do all that you can to keep our advantage plan from being cut." end quote. mr. president, every senior who voted, or every senator who voted for this train wreck owes an explanation for these medicare cuts which are already resulting in canceled plans, higher costs and reduced access to the doctors that they had and that they liked. and, mr. president, when the obamacare legislation was being debated and these proposed cuts to medicare were being advanced, many of us said that this would be a big mistake because what you're essentially doing is taking, cutting medicare program, particularly medicare advantage that is especially

helpful to a lot of seniors across this country and, frankly, working out there, taking the savings and using it to pay for a whole new entitlement program. at the time when we talked about this, we said because of the weird account, or conventions that are used in trust fund accounting here in washington, the hundreds of billions of dollars that were cut from medicare were not only used to pay for this new entitlement program for obamacare but also credited to the medicare trust fund. so they argue that they were preserving and extending the life of medicare at the same time they were using the savings, cuts coming from medicare advantage to pay for a whole new entitlement program. well, madam president, i think for most americans that would be spending the same money twice. it would be double accounting revenue. essentially what you're saying is we're going to put an i.o.u. into the medicare trust fund basically, a note that at some point in the future we're going to have to redeem to pay

benefits and that is going to require us to pay more money. it's intergovernmental debt. we talk about publicly held debt, that's debt held by the public but there is also intergovernmental debt and that adds to the total burdens we place on american citizens and debt we have to pay back in the future because essentially all you've said is you put an i.o.u. into that trust fund that at some point in the future when we need to be able to pay benefits to beneficiaries we're going to have to borrow money to do that, redeem that i.o.u.. essentially they were able to get to argue that we were extending somehow the life of medicare at the very time these cuts were being made and also at the same time paying for a whole new entitlement program under obamacare. it was spending the same money twice. it was double counting revenue, something that anywhere else in the country would probably land most americans in jail. but that being said, madam president, these medicare

advantage cuts are now having real-world impact, something we predicted all along. and medicare advantage, the reason it's a popular program, the reason that one in two new beneficiaries are signing up is it gives you options, it gives you choices. it provides competition, something that we need to have more of, not less of in health care today. if you want to put downward pressure on prices, if you want to constrain utilization in health care, then create competition out there. get people more -- give them more ownership, more skin in the game. give them some personal investment in their own health care decisions. as it is with a traditional medicare program we have a fee for service medicare program. many seniors are enrolled in that. but the medicare advantage gave them another option, an option that presented choices in options and opportunity to cover things they want to see covered in their health care plan and it has worked. it has been an effective

program, one i think most people point to as a success. so we're going to cut the very program that is working perhaps the best out there in terms of meeting the health care needs of america's seniors in order to fund a whole new entitlement program -- obamacare -- and in the meantime end up with these higher premiums, these canceled coverages and all the dislocations that are coming as a result of these medicare advantage cuts to seniors across this country. madam president, that is the wrong way in which to approach this issue. there is a much better way, one that relied more on the very things on which medicare advantage is based, and that's more competition, more choice, more options which wouldn't have led to canceled coverages, higher premiums, higher deductibles and fewer doctors and hospitals to choose from for america's seniors. but that's exactly where we are. and america's seniors are now experiencing the very thing that a lot of other americans have already experienced. people who get their insurance

in the individual marketplace have seen a lot of these canceled coverages already, have seen huge increases in premiums. many of us have been on the floor reading constituent mail, e-mails we get in our offices from families and individuals who have been adversely impacted and harmed by obamacare because of canceled coverages and higher premiums and higher deductibles and loss of doctors and hospitals. we've seen that in the individual marketplace. we're starting to see that. we're going to see more of this in the small business employer-provided marketplace. but now, madam president, as of last week the real impacts are being felt as well by seniors across this country who in big numbers have been signing up for medicare advantage. 15 million seniors, close to 30% of all medicare recipients are going to see as a result of this higher premiums and reduced access to health care because of the cuts that will occur to medicare advantage in order to pay for a new entitlement program, obamacare, which has

already demonstrated, based on the number of cancellations the administration has made -- or i should say the number of delays the administration has made, that it is not working. and i've argued a long time, madam president, as have many of my colleagues here, that it can't work because it's built upon a faulty foundation. there is a much better way to do this. we should do away with this approach, go back to the drawing board, use a step-by-step approach to reforming health care in this country, realizing the status quo doesn't work, but realizing as well that the best way to get lower costs, more affordable health care, more accessible health care for more american citizens to create downward pressure on prices. and that requires giving people choices, creating competition in the marketplace. those are the things we ought to be advocating and advancing rather than this top-down government knows best, one-size-fits-all solution coming out of washington, d.c. which is hurting more and more americans and most recently,

american citizens who are experiencing now the adverse impacts of obamacare because of the cuts to their very medicare advantage plans. madam president, i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

ms. ayotte: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from new hampshire. ms. ayotte: i ask that the quorum call be rescinded. the presiding officer: without objection. ms. ayotte: madam president, i come to the floor today to talk about a grave threat to the united states of america, a grave threat to the world and a grave threat to our friend and ally, the state of israel. and that is the threat of iran's nuclear weapons program. as we stand here today, pending on the floor has been legislation filed by senator richard burr. in that legislation contains important sanctions that are essentially an insurance policy to make sure that tehran does not play the united states of america and in fact that they are serious about stopping their nuclear weapons program.

fortunately, there is a history with iran. it's a history where we talk, they enrich, and there is a long history of that. and that's why it is so important right now that we have this insurance policy. these sanctions that are pending on the floor would only go in place if iran violates the interim agreement that pab -- has been entered into between the administration and other countries in the world and iran, and if they fail to reach a final agreement that is acceptable to the security interests of the united states of america and to our allies in the region to make the world a safer place. let me just say up front, we cannot accept a nuclear-capable

iran. in other words, an iran that is capable of having a nuclear weapon. why is that? iran is a country that has threatened to wipe the state of israel off the earth. iran has called our country the great satan. iran is the world's worst state sponsor of terrorism. they have supported terrorist groups like hezbollah and hamas. they have obviously worked, unfortunately, against our strong ally, israel. they have supported the murderous assad regime being one of the chief supporters of assad, providing arms to assad so that he can murder his own people. there are so many examples,

unfortunately, of the danger of iran having nuclear weapons capability. and if iran gets this capability, unfortunately we will also find ourselves in a position where we are in a nuclear arms race in the middle east. a sunni shia arms race that then will also threaten the world and make that region even more of a tinder box. so where we find ourselves right now, we are at a critical moment, and i'm deeply worried that the sanctions regime that this congress has worked so hard to put in place on a strong bipartisan basis is unraveling and that we need an insurance policy to make sure that iran knows that they are not going to

play us and unravel these sanctions. and the way we can do that is by having sanctions legislation passed that is prospective. if iran is serious about a nuclear weapons agreement that takes away their capability of having a nuclear weapon, then they should not have a problem with prospective sanctions by this congress, because those sanctions would only go in place again if they violate the interim agreement. and if their words mean anything, then they shouldn't have a problem with the fact that we're just saying that if you violate it, we will impose additional sanctions. we will not allow this sanctions regime to unravel. and what is the significance of this sanction regime? the work done by this congress on a bipartisan basis and with

other partners around the world is what has brought iran to the table. all of us want a diplomatic resolution that stops iran from having a nuclear weapon. but we need to go into this with clear eyes, and that's why having this insurance policy is so important. a final agreement with iran will only be meaningful if it ensures that they will not have the ability to enrich, because their ability to enrich makes it easier for them to immediately ramp up to nuclear weapons capability. and i recently attended a security conference in munich and met with some of the representatives of the arab nations, and they were in fact

asked in an open forum, if iran is allowed under what agreement is reached to enrich, what will the rest of you want to do? and the answer was that we will want the right to enrich too. so this final agreement needs to stop iran's ability to enrich because if we do not, we still face not only the risks of iran being able to quickly ramp up to a nuclear weapon and to its capability that can harm the world but also the risk that the arab nations themselves will all enrich. and so even if they don't have nuclear weapon capability, they are all right at the point where they could break tout that -- bk out to that capability, and that is just as dangerous for the world. so what we have pending on the floor makes clear that this agreement, if it is going to protect the united states of america, if it is going to protect our allies and protect the world, it has to be clear.

it should prevent iran from that enrichment capability. this agreement should stop their capability at the iraq facility to produce plutonium. this agreement should absolutely make sure that we are given access to their military facilities so that we understand and we can stop them from their programs working on weaponnization of nuclear materials. i serve on the senate srmd arme- senate armed services committee. the director of -- have told us that iran could have icbm capability. could you imagine if they were to continue with this nuclear program and continue it and also

have icbm capability? this is a true risk to the world. the agreement is only meaningful if it is an agreement that we can rely on, that is open, that is transparent, that is verifiable, and that it absolutely stops them from having a nuclear program that could be a threat to the world, understand that means things -- and that means things like stopping enrichment, stopping the iraq plutonium reactor and the weaponnization program. we need full access. that needs to be open. and we should be addressing iran's acts of terrorism throughout the world because one of the grave dangers that i worry about is that iran itself, if it has a nuclear weapon, may not use it itself but may pass it on to the terrorist groups that iran is associated with, and that is a grave danger, not

only to our ally israel but also to the united states of america. one of the reasons i believe that the sanctions legislation on the floor that's pending is so important is because some of the statements that have been made recently been the regime in tehran are very troubling and really haras hearken back to thr prior behavior of we talk, they enrich, and question how serious they are about a verifiable, transparent, and real agreement to stop their nuclear weapons program. for example, on february 18, in talks between iran and the p-5-plus-1 held in vienna, the supreme leader ayatollah khomeini said that talks will not lead anywhere. in advantages of the talks, president rue wasn't knee, which

prime minister netanyahu has described as a wolf in sheep's clothe shall dndz and i would -e agreed with him on that -- has stated that peaceful will be pursued forever. iran foreign minister a recently clashed. iran has h. no need for either facility. make no mistake, if iran is serious about giving up its nuclear weapons capability, then -- or their pursuit of that capability, then she is absolutely right. there is no need for the iraq facility that allows them to produce lou to enium. there is no need for these underground facilities like fordo, trying to hide their program from the rest of the

world. and the foreign minister in reaction to his comments described her statement as worthless and reinforced iran's position that that is not negotiable, their ability to produce atomic energy, the plea to enium reactor at iraq. this is deeply, deeply troubling and it is one of the reasons that we need to send a clear message now here. they came to the table because of sanctions. the sanctions were having a deteriorating effect on their economy. yet recently we have seen that my fear is that the sanctions regime is unraveling and they're actually using this negotiation with the administration to further unravel those sanctions, to get what they want without an insurance policy that we will get what we want. and that's what this sanction legislation does.

and wufnght issues that has come up is in february a french trade delegation representing 116 french companies traveled to tehran. recently i met with one of the arab nation's foreign ministers and he told me that the hotel rooms in tehran are filled with businessmen and women looking to line up, to do business with tehran. this is a real issue that the sanctions regime is starting to unravel and the legislation that we have -- that's pending on the floor with 59 cosponsors is an insurance policy to say, if this agreement and you are not serious about this agreement, we will impose further sanctions, to make sure that we do everything we can to stop you from having nuclear weapons

capability. this is a critical moment in the history of this country. this is a critical moment for the safety of the world. we want to stop iran using diplomatic means from having nuclear weapons capability because of the risk it presents to the world, but we cannot be naive. we have to understand the prior behavior of iran because the prior behavior of iran, that will allow us to go in with eyes wide open rather than just taking their assurances that they are serious. -- that they are serious about a nuclear weapons agreement that will stop them from having this capability. so as we stand here on the floor today, i would ask the majority leader to allow a vote on this

legislation, to allow us to send a clear message to iran, to send a clear message to the rest of the world that they should not think that they should do further business with iran unless iran is serious about giving up its nuclear weapons program through a transparent, verifiable agreement that will ensure that they cannot threaten the state of israel, that they cannot threaten the rest of the world with a nuclear weapon. so i would ask the majority leader to allow a vote on this important legislation. you know, there are so few pieces of legislation that come through the senate that actually have 59 cosponsors. this is one of them. it certainly has strong

bipartisan support, and i don't buy the argument that if we were to pass this legislation that somehow iran would walk away from the negotiations. if iran walks away from the negotiations because we've passed prospective legislation as an insurance policy to make sure that they are serious about a real, verifiable agreement that stops their nuclear weapons program, then, frankly, we know that they have been playing us because the reality is, if they're serious, they shouldn't care if we've put an insurance policy out there because, if they're serious, they'll follow through, they'll do what the interim agreement requires, and they will agree to a final agreement that stops their nuclear weapons program in a transparent, verifiable way once

and for all. on the other hand, if they're just going to walk away with the threat of prospective sanctions, how serious can they be? and we then will still have the sanctions regime in place that will continue to put pressure on them to say, the united states of america and our allies, we will not accept a nuclear-armed iran because of the threat it presents to us, because we cannot allow the largest state sponsor and most serious sponsor of terrorism around the world to have this capability. we cannot allow a race in the middle east between a sunni -- a sunni-shia race to see who can have a nuclear weapon first because of the danger it represents to the world. and, finally, we cannot allow iran to continue to threaten our friend and ally, the state of israel, and i understand and

appreciate that when iran and its leaders have made statements that they want to annihilate israel from the face of the earth, that our friends in israel take that very serious. they have vowed never again. we stand with them never again, not only for their friendship but also for the safety of the world. and so today we have pending on this floor an opportunity to make clear what the united states of america stands for and that we will not accept a nuclear-armed iran, and they must be serious or there will be consequences in terms of economic sanctions. thank you, madam president. i yield the floor.

i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

mr. murphy: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from connecticut of the mr. murvery: i ask we dispense with the quorum call. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. murphy: thank you, madam president. yesterday we received news that 4 million people have now signed up in private health care exchanges all across the country. in addition, it was released that about 12 million people have called the call centers in january alone. 1.1 million people signed up to receive health care through the affordable care act during that time. young enrollment, the group of individuals that there's always been a question about as to whether they are going to sign up for these exchanges, grew by 65%. and it's time for this body to recognize that the affordable

care act is working. it's working for people that have been desperate to get insurance. it's working for people that have been getting the short end of the stick from insurance companies, and it's working for millions of seniors all across this country who have been paying far too much for prescription drug costs and for preventive health care. now, we've known this from the very beginning in connecticut. despite the mic the hiccups in e enrollment in the fall period, states like connecticut who have been committed to making this law work, rather than undermining it, have seen this success from day one. connecticut at the ou outset sad that we were going to try enroll between the october 1 date and march 31 about 80,000 people. that was our goal. well, we just announced in connecticut, a state that is working to implement the law, not undermine the law, that we didn't just hit 80,000, we

didn't just hit 100,000, but we've enrolled 126,000 connecticut residents in our health care exchanges and in medicaid. our projection is that we are going to h enroll 150,000 people by march 31. that is nearly double our initial estimate. last week traffic on connecticut's web site rose 31% and the daily enrollments rose by 67%. and the stories just keep on coming in to our office about the lives that are being changed as people for the first time in their life get access to afordable health care. people like susie clayton, who has been dealing with a cancer diagnosis for over a decade, a crippling preexisting condition that for most of her adult life has kept her out of the ranks of the insured. i've known susie for probably

two decades and almost every single conversation i've had with susie over those 20 years has been about her daily struggle to try to deal with her illness and her preexisting condition. every single day, every single week she has thought about whether or not she's going to be able to be able to pay for her health care if she has a recurrence of her cancer, whether or not during that time she's going to have a job that provides her with insurance. susie had been paying about $1,700 a month at last count for an insurance plan that she could afford and her life changed on january 1. she now is paying a couple hundred dollars a month in premiums and she finally gets to wake up every day not having to worry about whether she is going to be able to afford coverage, whether or not she's going to be able to see a doctor to deal with her very difficult diagnosis. and with 4 million people now

enrolled in these exchanges across the country, that story can be replicated over and over. a bunch of our republican colleagues have been down here on the floor in the last couple days, i was in the presiding chair yesterday listening to some speeches regarding some new news about medicare advantage. now, everybody knows by now that included in the health care bill was an end to the subsidies given to medicare advantage plans. the private sector in health care and in other industries always tells us that they can do things more cheaply than the federal government and a lot of times they're right about that. but it was exactly the opposite when it came to medicare advantage. we were paying private insurance companies 13% more than it cost the federal government to run medicare. and this was a source of enormous profit for the insurance companies. it just didn't make sense to oversubsidize insurance companies to run a program that the federal government itself

was running for 13% less money. and so we ended those subsidies and part of the elimination of those subsidies goes into effect but the story that's being told on the floor today just isn't true. the fact is, is that since the affordable care act was passed, even as we have been implementing these cuts to these overly generous, unjustifiable subsidies to insurance companies, medicare advantage enrollment has gone up by 30%. 30% more seniors are now enrolled in medicare advantage, even as these cuts have been imposed. premiums are down. medicare advantage premiums have been reduced by 10%. now, over the course of the debate on the medicare advantage cuts, i heard republican after republican when i was in the house of representatives come down to the floor and tell us that the sky was going to fall when we ended these subsidies to

insurance companies. and i'll be honest, a lot of them are in my state of connecticut. but not only has the sky not fallen, it's -- it's raised 30% more seniors in medicare advantage, 10% less in premiums. and to the argument that i've heard on this floor, that there are going to be less choices available to seniors because of these cuts going into effect, let's just be honest. the average medicare beneficiary has 18 different medicare advantage plans to choose from. 18 different plans. that's a pretty robust market. and let me just add to that, that republicans have voted for these cuts themselves. the ryan budget, which has essentially been the budget standard for republicans in both the house and the senate, endorsed by hundreds of republican legislators, the paul ryan budget included the cuts to medicare advantage subsidies because republicans have agreed with democrats that there's no

reason to subsidize insurance companies instead of subsidizing beneficiaries. so what happened when we decided to stop subsidizing medicare advantage? well, enrollment went up 30%, premiums went down 10%, the average beneficiary still had to choose from 18 different plans. but we took that money that we saved in padding the pockets of health care insurance companies and we went out and sold seniors that -- told seniors that when you show up to get a preventive health care visit, you're not going to have to pay anything out of pocket. and so since the a.c.. a. has beec.a. has beenpassed, r has to pay for their annual checkup -- nothing. 25 million people have gotten free preventive care since the affordable care act has been passed. what else did we do? we decided that this doughnut hole in the prescription drug bill, whereby you got coverage

upfront, then you had to pay for a certain amount of drugs yourself and then you got catastrophic coverage, just didn't make sense. and so we eliminated i the prescription drug doughnut hole. it will be gone by 2020. it's been cut by more than half already. and since the implementation of the affordable care act, the average senior has saved $1,200 in prescription drug costs thanks to the affordable care act. and so as i listen to my republican colleagues come down here and explain about the cuts to medicare advantage, cuts, in fact, that many of them have supported, i just think we have to ask ourselves, if you had a choice to provide a 13% subsidy to for-profit insurance companies or pass along $1,200 in savings to american seniors and eliminate the costs that many of these fixed-income seniors pay when they go in to get preventive care, what would you choose? because this is really all about choices in this body. it's just about choices in terms

of where we put the money that we spend on behalf of medicare beneficiaries. and to me it's a no-brainer. to the american public it's a no-brainer. instead of subsidizing insurance companies, let's subsidize hardworking seniors who have built this country with $1,200 in drug savings and 25 million people who have gotten free preventive

joined as we launch a new effort to really make clear to the american people that now with four million people enrolled and millions of people saving money, that notwithstanding the legitimate difficulties that were encountered in the first days of the web site, the affordable care act is working. it's working for millions and millions of people across this country who are finally getting care. we will be joined today as well by a couple of medicare recipients who are glad that they now have the protection when they get into the doughnut hole. they are glad that they now get free preventative care. and they will take the choice any day of this congress and this government investing in them instead of investing in big for-profit insurance companies. none of us deny that there are bumps in the road as you rework

1/6 of the american economy, which represents our health care economy. none of us will deny that there is no excuse for the fact that for the first few months there were a lot of people that weren't able to enroll that wanted to. but now that the enrollment site is working, now that outreach efforts are up and running, record numbers of people are signing up for health care because there is an almost insatiable demand for quality, affordable health care that is now being met as the affordable care act is working. i yield back the floor and note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from connecticut. mr. blumenthal: i thank my colleague from connecticut. the presiding officer: the senate is in a quorum call. mr. blumenthal: i ask the quorum

call be lifted. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. blumenthal: i want to begin by thanking my friend and colleague from connecticut, senator murphy, for the very eloquent and powerful remarks that he has just made, showing america the connecticut experience with health care which shows that the affordable care act is working and is expanding opportunities for health care across the country, and once the myths are exploded, once the truth is told, americans will appreciate how fortunate we are to have this reform in the way that health care is insured and delivered for the american people, and there are bumps in the road, as senator murphy has just said. there will continue to be issues to be overcome in achieving success, but the enormous

potential to make america healthier, to eliminate the anxiety and anguish that americans experience in seeking quality of life that health care affords is an opportunity and obligation that we cannot shirk, and i'm proud to join with him in speaking this truth and clarifying for people across the country the great promise of this program. a lot of the promise still has to be fulfilled. a lot of the realization about that promise has to be educated, but we will succeed in that effort, and i thank him and my other colleagues who are joining us in seeking to make america realize the great potential and promise that we have and already

the great accomplishments that have been made, and connecticut stands as a model for both the promise and the accomplishments in the 100,000 people that have already enrolled in the benefits for young people now permitted to stay on their policies and the elimination of preexisting conditions as an obstacle to insurance. i know about many of these issues and obstacles from my time as attorney general. when i fought insurance companies that denied basic opportunity and failed to fulfill their obligation and impose these kinds of obstacles. now, hopefully insurers will be a partner in this effort and so will the medical community and business community across the country. so i look forward to continuing this effort and thank him for the exposition he has just given

and my other colleagues who will join us later today. i want to focus on a group that particularly needs health care in this country, and that is our veterans. we are here to talk about the comprehensive veterans health and benefits and military retirement pay restoration act of 2014, a measure that seeks to address comprehensively the challenges that our veterans face today, and there are more and more veterans. we are losing some of the greatest generation. in fact, we are losing them tragically and unfortunately every day, but the next greatest generation needs the same benefits and services that we have given to the greatest generation. the next greatest generation are serving right now and have served recently in the wars of iraq and afghanistan, and we must be unwavering in our

commitment to our veterans. we must determine that this big and broad bill is necessary to keep faith with them and make sure that we meet the diverse and urgent needs that they present. now, we all talk in this body about our commitment to veterans, but all too often our nation has failed to keep faith, and i've learned that we all have expressed here our admiration and commitment to our nation's veterans. i have introduced, like many of my colleagues, a veterans bill based on my input from my constituents. in fact, my very first piece of legislation as a senator was the honoring all veterans act. but the reality is that this comprehensive approach is

necessary, and i want to thank senator sanders as chairman of the veterans affairs committee for recognizing that the needs of our veterans are interlocking, multifaceted and manifold in the kinds of problems that are raised as they leave the military and enter the civilian world. sometimes it's their medical records that cannot be transferred seamlessly from the department of defense to veterans' affairs and veterans administration facilities. and sometimes it is the failure to make their military skills transferable in credentials and licenses, and sometimes it is medical conditions, health care needs for posttraumatic stress and traumatic brain injury that

make their wounds invisible. make them difficult to discern to the ordinary eye but are there deeply and enduringly unless they are treated properly, and that's why health care for them is so important and why this bill expands opportunity for health care so dramatically. the health care needs of our veterans must be met through the provisions of this bill that expand health care opportunity and services. when i first came to the senate, i thought -- and i think reasonably -- that a veteran needing health care could simply go to a v.a. hospital to receive it, but that's really not the case. on january 17, 2003, the department of veterans affairs announced that it would -- quote -- temporarily -- unquote --

suspend enrolling priority group eight veterans. that temporary restriction stands today. so under existing restrictions, a veteran making as little as $35,577 or a family of five making a household income of $50,025 can be denied health benefits. there are an estimated 720,000 priority group eight veterans who are not enrolled in health care. tens of thousands of veterans apply each year for enrollment and are denied due to that means test. sympathy put, the v.a. should have the capacity and resource to serve every veteran, and that's why section 301 of this bill would allow veterans who lack that access, who do not have a service-connected

disability and who do not have affordable health insurance to enroll in the v.a.'s health care system. there are other health care provisions. section 305 which expands the provision of chiropractic care, sections 331 and 332 and 333 which expand complementary and alternative medicine. anybody who has not yet seen "escape fire" should view it to understand the stark ways that veterans have challenges in access to alternative treatments and why drug addiction and abuse can become such a problem. and section 334, extending wellness programs. all of these programs are vital as well as the expanded access to treatment for posttraumatic stress and traumatic brain injury, which in my view are at

the core of the need for this legislation, and 342 would require the v.a. to contract with outside providers to establish a program of supportive services to family members and caregivers of veterans suffering from mental illness. all of these invisible conditions have such dramatic consequences in the employability of veterans and their ability to give back and continue to contribute to this nation as so many of them wish to do. the needs of our veterans are also pressing in disability claim. the need to end the backlog is again one of the areas addressed directly in this bill. backlog disability claims at the department of veterans affairs have become a chronic problem. the v.a. is making progress, no question that the numbers are better today than they were, but

there are still army veterans like jordan masa in connecticut who served in afghanistan and marine veteran david alexander who was deployed in iraq who had to wait too long and suffered as a result, and we need to keep faith with those veterans. i understand and i applaud general shinseki who is committed to tackling this problem, but some 389,000 claims are still backlogged in connecticut. about 48% of the claims are backlogged, meaning that 48% of claims made by our veterans take more than 125 days to be resolved. each of these veterans has an individual story, a record of service, a record of suffering, be it in today's wars or con afflicts -- conflicts past. a record of service is

exemplified by every one of them, and these individuals may now be looking for employment or support of family. we need to keep faith with them. this legislation aims to decrease the backlog further through an accelerated appeal process and getting the way the information it needs to decide these claims. it brings in local government to help with the claim, and it helps veterans who have misfiled documents in the claims process to seek a better route and path to what they need and deserve. the bill also would require regular reports to congress on efforts to eliminate the backlog accountability is so critical. accountability on backlogs, on all of the issues that underlie the failure to process these claims as quickly as they should be, and the backlog must be

eliminated. employment programs are also addressed in this bill. so are the traumatic effects of sexual assault. the bill is multifaceted and comprehensive, as it should be, to address the diverse and urgent needs. it must be big and broad because the needs and challenges of our veterans are big and broad. the reality is one million men and women will leave the military over the next five years. one million patriotic and brave men and women will be separating from our armed forces, becoming veterans. they will need services and benefits that they have earned, and they will need them at the time they leave, not at some distant point in the future. we owe it to them now to keep faith. i have submitted amendments that

would address some of the other issues. for example, the need to recognize that posttraumatic stress is not only a condition that afflicts our current military men and women and veterans, but also past veterans, even though it was undiagnosed and untreated at the time. changing their status so as to recognize posttraumatic stress for the veterans of past wars is a need that we need to address. and i will make sure that those veterans of past wars, whether it is vietnam or korea or any of those conflicts in our history, receive a second look at their discharge. that's the purpose of the amendment, that's the purpose of legal action that has been

brought by the yale veterans clinic and i will continue to support it. we can go further as well to enhance our veterans' health by including the toxic exposure research and military family support act in this measure and i have an amendment that would do so. many veterans were exposed to toxic chemicals such as agent orange and their needs are only beginning to be addressed. in addition to the harmful effects to these individuals, there are also impacts on their children and for many years, those who were exposed to agent orange were told there was no evidence that their symptoms resulted in exposure. now that we have evidence that agent orange is toxic, we need to include the longer-term effects on their children and their families. and an amendment that i've offered would address those

issues. even if none of these amendments that i've proposed are adopted during this process, this measure stands on its own as a historic step forward. it is indeed a historic recognition of the obligation and opportunity that we have at this point in our history to make sure that we leave no veteran behind and keep faith with our veterans, address their needs in a big and broad bill that reflects the urgent and diverse issues and challenges that they face. and i am proud to support it and thank my colleagues on the veterans affairs committee who have approved many of the parts of this bill by unanimous vote

or overwhelming majorities, bipartisan, and this cause should be truly bipartisan. let us move forward and move america forward in addressing the needs and challenges of its veterans as we have an obligation to do. we must keep faith with our veteran and leave no veteran behind. thank you, madam president. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. mr. blumenthal: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from connecticut. mr. blumenthal: i ask that the quorum call be lifted. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. blumenthal: i have nine unanimous consent requests for committees to meet during today's session of the senate. they have the approval of the majority and minority leaders. i ask unanimous consent these requests be agreed to and that these requests be printed in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. blumenthal: thank you, madam president.

i yield the floor, i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call: