columbia. they did not have to reach the question of whether or not that applies to a state or not. as you go back several decades, you find cases where the court actually had not held right, the individual right, and the involved states. that is why the lower courts after that case were sort of betwixt and between. some of them thought that the old cases where the only ones that should involve states, and said it does not apply because we did not have precedence. that was a federal case and the court has not disturb those in the earlier cases. some courts said, well, we cannot say that applies to the state because the supreme court has not said it. other said, yeah, but how could they not because it applies now as it does to d.c. it was a split of the circuit, and that point, the court stepped in. and we argued that i think in january. february?

probably february argument. . >> senate is in a rare meeting today to move the health care bill to the floor. in order for formal debate to begin, democrats must get 60 votes. if they do, debate could begin after the thanksgiving break. watched senate coverage today on c-span2.

you can watch what your senators are saying online. a search by name -- search by name. you can read the health care bill and paul ebert twitter conference at c-span's healthcare hub at c-span.org. >> 29, on c-span, several mayors discussed the state of several cities and the will later have highlights from the health-care debate in the senate today. -- tonight, on c-span, several mayors discussed the state of several cities and be -- and will later have -- and we will later have highlights from the health-care debate in the senate today. this is about three hours. >>

natural and areas in the united states and the as many of you know, the you know the standing contention of our program at brookings is that we are in metropolitan nation, that the national economy is essentially the makeup of a network of metropolitan economies. and some national economic recovery from the current downturn very much depends on recovery of metropolitan economies. today we will be discussing how a large extent the recovery of metro's depends to a meaningful degree on cities or other local governments being fiscally healthy. it's not yet been covered too much in the mainstream public discourse but given the worst recession we've seen in decades potentially overwhelming local government fiscal crisis is now

looming on the horizon and our partners at the national cities have conducted a very timely survey showing a nearly nine in ten city finance officers are reporting difficulties in meeting fiscal needs and 2009 and expect the same in 2010. the pain is widespread from foreclosure cities in the metro like phoenix and vegas to areas like cleveland and st. louis and new york suffering losses in auto and manufacturing industries and financial services and those places heavily reliant on state and local aid in massachusetts, new jersey, most of the northeast. all this local level stress has serious implications for the national economic recovery. over the next couple of years just as the federal recovery spending trails off continuing local government budget tightening and expenditure cuts can impose significant drag on

the economy even as it is about to turn the corner. as we all know when cities and suburban municipalities make cutbacks daily off workers and for low and cancel vendor contracts and eliminate funding to nonprofit providers. all of which were directly remove demand from local and regional economies because numerous individuals and organizations are across the metro left with less money to spend on salaries, supplies or consumption. that is the dynamic facing cities in many suburbs all across the country. so again to put it simply there can't be a national health the economy without healthy local and regional economies. in that they might today's conversation is going to lead to some thought-provoking conversation on the position of cities in today's economy is, future prospects and the relationships to state and local governments. mayors are making tough decisions and that is what you are going to hear today.

the are being incredibly creative to reduce the carnage and we may need additional federal intervention beyond the american recovery and reinvestment act to stave off real disruption of the local level of the next year. before we turn to the rest of today i want to take a moment to introduce the executive director of the national league of cities which is coasting our event today. and i would ask him to make a few remarks. i give you the proper introduction here as a co-sponsor. donner is expected director of the national league of cities. that is the oldest and largest national organization that represents municipal governments in this country. importantly he is more than 35 years' experience in the municipal government of the public interest sector. you probably go back to which recession in the 70's or 80's we i'd learned lessons from. but he is uniquely experienced to talk today as a leader on

these issues. [applause] >> thank you, bruce. we are delighted to be here. as bruce said the national league of cities is the oldest and largest and india through a network of state municipal league we represent over 18,000 cities, towns and villages across the country. local governments, as bruce has said and i think you're all aware is facing unprecedented fiscal challenges. this is on known for our generation. fortunately, local elected officials are what i like to refer to as prudent optimists. they acknowledge the reality they can front and make tough budget decisions and what the try to do is maximize the services, that is even though they are making cuts will try to do is provide services so that it seems seem less. there is however a tipping point. there is a point that does

revenues are reduced there are consequences for programs, and one of the problems is the public often hears about the cuts, they see no changes in services and could include city governments can do more if you give them less. but that doesn't work. there is a point where there is -- the last 25 years the national league of cities -- this year. but based on the studies we have done the longitudinal studies we have been pretty good at forecasting what the consequences are going to be after a downturn, and right now it really appears it is going to be 18 months to 24 months before we see any kind of uptick in terms of what happens to the budgets of local governments.

for the past two or three decades cities have looked to the federal government from a more defensive perspective them as perspective. they've been concerned about unfunded federal mandates which we sometimes referred to as shift and shaft federalism. [laughter] they are also concerned about preemption, federal preemption. at the same time if you go back to the 70's, the city budgets received about 17% of their revenue from federal programs. right now is maybe 5%. so there has been a decrease in the kind of support local governments have received from the federal government. from our perspective the increase in unfunded@@@@@@@ @ @r the interdependence and state

and federal government. our national economy is merely the sum of the metropolitan regional economy. it makes it imperative for state and local and federal governments to collaborate in order to address the dramatic crisis to confront at this moment, it operated to the three decades ago. in fact, our colleagues restore the federal partnership those you will hear from today will describe the reality to match: revenues that they confront in the community. we again need to acknowledge that we have a system that

requires an appreciation is what we need to address today. [applause] whoever came up with that line, deserves a bonus we will start with two experts and then shipped to the fiscal implications. first up, and we will have steve cochran. he is a managing director. he directs the research and development right now.

chris is from the league of cities. he is the director of the center for research and innovation there. this organization does qualities, independent, rigorous work. his areas of expertise include much of what we are going to talk about today. so, steve. >> it is a pleasure to be here and to be given the opportunity to set the stage for this discussion. i want to divide by talk and the three very short parts. i want to give you a brief outlook of the u.s. economy and what that means. second, i want to illustrate what the most important risks to that outlook are right now. they will be focusing on

consumer spending and housing markets and one-third -- will be looking at city fiscal conditions. have for city fiscal conditions. so, let me jump right in here. the recession is over even though it may not feel like it's over our estimate is that the recession did and in the month of august. the war on the right-hand side of each of these quarters, the blue bar is our estimate and outlook for annual growth, real gdp for the u.s., the broadest measure of the economy and we estimate right now the economy is growing at a rate of about 3% per year. you will see if you look at the right hand bar which is the green bar that is the estimate of the contribution of federal stimulus spending to economic growth, and you can see that a good part of the economic growth today is to to the active role of the federal stimulus programs right now. the risk is that most of the

effective stimulus spending happens when spending ramps up. when it levels off and then even more importantly when it begins to fade in the coming quarters that the economy has to pick up in self sustaining pattern without so much help from policy. you can see we expect with that blue bar showing very slow growth in the first half of 2010 and then picking up as the economy gains speed in the second half of 2010 into 2011. it does seem a little fragile right now with the unemployment rate jumping in october over 10% to 10.2% it could very well be higher than that right now. it really does make us feel like the recovery is fragile. yesterday there was a report to the housing starts on construction. that fell in the month of october as well. one reason things seem so fragile is there isn't a whole

lot of hiring going on in the economy right now. layoffs have abated and that is why show on the green line here which should be read on the right can access. you can see the peak in the first quarter when there was so much panic in the economy when nobody had a good handle on what was happening and where the economy was going to go nobody's really hiring. there is not enough confidence yet among employers to actually go out and a ramp up again and they are holding their own and that is one reason productivity growth is actually quick right now. but there is no hiring and that is allowing the on and planet rate to rise even as the labor force does not shrink. you can see in this map where the weakness is. the states that are red or the states where the on an plowman rate has risen to highest from i.t. each state's low point cut the unemployment rate which was usually wait 06 or early 07 and compare to the latest on an plan

rate and you can see that it's the west coast. it is much of the southeast and it is parts of the industrial midwest where the unemployment rate has risen the highest. if labour force wasn't shrinking to but seymour made in places like ohio and indiana and wisconsin. the risk here is when the rate rises as fast as it is in some of these areas that is where is the most slack in the labour market and that means potentially the least potential in the near term for any improvement in wage growth because of the excess supply of labour in many of these markets. and we -- wage growth will mean income growth and we can see actually the weak income growth is already evident in fact as of the second quarter which is the latest free on personal income growth for the state's income was down over the year actually every state except in the dakotas and where it was down the most on the ret states in this matter and so it's the west

coast lae&y@@@@@@@@ @ @ @ @ @ @ in new york and southern new england and southern carolina which was set by finance. housing finance manufacturing, those are the defining factors that are driving the pattern of growth right now. there is weakness in income and weakness in the labor markets and it generates the first risk that i mentioned. it is an extended period of consumer spending that means that there are weak sales taxes. ak sales tax revenue growth and that will hit cities very hard the depend on sales taxes. it also means fairly weak income tax we will go live to capitol hill. senate democratic leaders are offering their reaction to the health care vote today. >> they should not be afraid to

debate. this is the united states senate. the two senators that led the way in this whole process are standing with me tonight. we are sorry that max baucus is not here. there are elements of this bill that senator dodd has worked on for years, issues that you have worked on for many years are now part of this legislation. we can see the finish line, but we are not there. we have not yet crossed that line. the road ahead is a long stretch. we can see the finish line. we have the momentum that will keep this process moving. i have no doubt. we know that not what -- not all 100 senators agree, but we must move forward they agree on the

vast majority. probably more than 90% for sure. all democrats know that now is the time to make sure that all americans have access to affordable health care. when this debate begins on the floor, the differences will be clear to the american people. they will see our plan. our plan saves lives, money and saves medicare. they will see the republican alternative, which i am sorry to say is nonexistent, so it keeps our broken system just the way it is. it lets it get even worse. we are really happy with this bill. we welcome a debate on this bill to build upon it. we look forward to bringing

quality health care to the american people that they have deserved since the first days of harry truman. it is a long time since 1945 when he wrote that letter to us, but it is a time that must begin and it has begun now we will mmove forward on this. senator dodd? >> again, my congratulations to leader read for keeping us together over these past many months and to max baucus who has done a great job on the finance committee. as i mentioned earlier, ted kennedy made this because of his life and last year -- >> we just spoke to ms. kennedy and she was in tears. >> tonight, as americans, we

will watch this boat as many did -- this vote, as many did. we have a lot of work in front of us. i want a debate that is long overdue. this is the 21st century. the fact that so many of our fellow citizens, those that are under insured and wondering if they have adequate amount of coverage, and for the millions who have no coverage whatsoever, this is a critical moment. this is the united states of america and there are certain things that you should have a right to. one thing is certain. you should have a right to decent health care, to be able to see a doctor when you need it. that is what we are attempting to do with this bill. that is what we have done for the very first time in the

history of our country, to have a health care plan that will serve all the people of our nation. nothing less than that is our objective. we have begun that journey. i am as confident that as i stand before you with our leader, that we are going to accomplish that goal. before this journey is over, we will have passed national health care coverage for all americans. >> i cannot think of a better vote to have right before thanksgiving i think the american people, when they learn what is in this bill, will be very thankful that we are moving ahead. make no mistake about it. this is a momentous vote that we just had tonight. it is a pivotal vote. as we now move ahead in the debate and the amending process, the american people will learn more and more about

what is in this bill. this bill is a good deal for america. it reduces the deficit and we will recover 98% budget will cover 90% of the people of this country it will stop industry abuses -- of this country. it will stop industry abuses. it will keep people healthy in the first place, to change the paradigm away from a sick care system to the true health care system. we have rounded third and we are headed home, but it is a long way from third to home. but we are going to get there. i want to thank our leader for all that he has done. i said today that he has the patience of job, the wisdom of solomon, and the endurance of samson and putting this

together. i think chris dodd for his great leadership in getting this bill through the committee and also senator baucus for his great leadership on the finance committee and we hope that his mother is going to be fine and will have a good thanksgiving together. now, onward and let's get this bill done and get it to the president for a signature. >> we will take a couple of questions. >> senator lincoln made it clear that she was not one to support any kind of public option. >> i support a strong public auction. i welcome senator schumer who said that they're working together to find a public option that is acceptable to all democrats. >> you must be wondering when you might get 60 votes again.

that is a simple question to answer. we will get 60 votes will have a bill that we want to send to the president. >> [inaudible] >> it is my understanding that senator lambert is working with senator schumer. >> what can we do now? >> i was focused on getting the votes. i took all senators calls, but no one else's. >> you said you spoke with senator kennedy's wife. >> i will remember the call, always. she was crying pretty hard and we both said that ted would be

happy. he would write me one of his little letters and we both felt that he is watching what took place tonight. >> with history on your side, does it work for you? -- is the weight of history on your side? >> i am a historian. i have written a history book. i love history. i am in the process of reading directs a history of civilization -- durant's " history of civilization." i believe this is a historic time in our country. i believe that this has been for too long in the making and we, -- we have heard from senator dodd and we will get health care

reform. the american people need it and they deserve it. last year, 750,000 american people filed for bankruptcy and half of them filed for bankruptcy due to health care costs. more than half of those that filed because of health care costs had insurance. our great country cannot let this go on. > earlier today, mcconnell hd late held conference. this is about 20 minutes.

>> good afternoon everyone. let me start with this 2000 page bill will raise taxes and insurance premiums for 85% of americans that have insurance. if that were not bad enough, if you look at the fully implemented bill over a 10-year period were all of the

provisions are operating, it is a 2.5 trillion dollar expansion the cost to individual americans is going to go up. and we thought this was all about trying to been the cost curve, but to regular citizens, the cost is going to go up dramatically. we talk about different parts of the bill, let me call on senator byrd from north carolina. >> mitch, thank you. i know this has been a long week for everybody in the room. but just remember, this 20 pounds is the size of many people's turkey next week. that is what most people in north carolina think about the bill, too. we're here to talk about what you're hearing at home.

what are north carolinian is concerned about? jobs. they lifted me and ask what this has to do with me. i have to look them in the face and say that if your small business and you cannot compete and offer health care today, if you had your 51st employee, we will send you a tax bill of $38,000. there is no incentive in this bill for small business to succeed. this bill is actually the cause of the potential continuation of high unemployment in this country because small business sees it as a limiting factor. no. 2, i come from a state that has had more investment in the last 10 years in

pharmaceuticals, vaccines, medical devices. it is the largest employer when you look at health care in my state of north carolina. what do we do? we take those very crucial areas, those keys to our success to bring down the cost of health care by curing disease and by detecting early and by increasing the number of options that we have for treatment. we automatically put a new tax on them. to those who research, to those who develop, to those who manufacture, we tax their products. pharmaceuticals, biologics, medical devices, i might also add that it is ironic that we have also put a new tax on the vaccine for h1n1 as we struggle to get that supply out. i guess i should not be shocked when you look at the bill, that

you find the word choice only 40 times. you find the word innovation only 25 times. you find the word competition only 13 times. that is in stark contrast to the 4677 times the to find the work required, must, or shall. or the 470 times that it refers to the agency or department or bureau or commission or panel. north carolinians are asking if this is a health care reform bill. this is not. it is a layaway plan. this is the harry wu read layaway plan for this holiday season. pay in for four years before you get the first benefit back out,

and then in four years, you'll find out exactly how expensive this plan was >> we have all received a lot of calls and letters about this bill and i would say that our calls have been about 90-1 in opposition to this legislation. i pulled out a letter from someone that comes out of their rural area in nebraska. this is what this person wants me to be aware of when we cast our vote. this person says that for the first time in their career, they are honestly questioning how much longer they can continue to constantly be up regulations -- up against regulations when all you want to do is make a difference in someone's life when someone's life is exhausted.

you see, in all states, we have a royrural area . there are critical access hospitals. i visit these hospitals and communities take a lot of pride because they know that if the hospital is in trouble, and when i go to these hospitals, they do find the drivers and bake sales and everything to try to support these little community facilities. i always ask the same questions. i ask, if you could keep this hospital opened on medicaid reimbursements, could you do that? >> they said that they would go broke. 35%-40% of doctors in our

country do not take medicaid because the reimbursement rates are so bad. what is the solution? add millions of people to medicaid and your going to have the biggest meltdown you ever saw. then i asked the second question. i asked how they kept that hospital open and they said that it would go broke. what is the solution? the solution is to cut medicare by about $500 billion. who are these people listening to. aren't they talking to hospital administrators and doctors or nursers that are working to keep these hospitals open? i was in nebraska, a beautiful

part of our state. it sets up in the northern area of our state. if you look at a map of nebraska after i say this, this will really come home to you. but when the northwest part and more towards the central part of our state come in there is one single hospital left that delivers babies. when we cut their rates, and that hospital cannot stay open, and a struggle like they do like every other hospital, that is a very serious consequence. if i were senator reid, i would take two weeks, i would take this bill to community hospitals across this country, little communities and i would listen to the people. i guarantee you one thing, he would get an earful. this bill does not work for america. it does not work for nebraska.

thank you. >> good afternoon. i am new to the senate and i have come here with an open mind and coming here to try to be a problem solver and obviously, health care is a big issue for florida. we have nearly 4 million people who were uninsured and the cost of health care -- who are uninsured and the cost of health care has the highest -- we have -- 3 million seniors on medicare. what i have found in a little more than two months is that we do not get to be part of the process. we do not get to be part of the process that determines what is in this bill. tonight, we are and to vote on this piece of legislation that does not do good things for florida. it will cut half a trillion dollars from medicare. it will take $120 billion out of

medicare advantage. we have more than 900,000 florida seniors who in joint military advantage and i am getting phone calls and letters from my constituents that are saying that we cannot cut this program. it is not only helping me with their -- is not only helping them with their eye care and hearing care, but diabetic supplies. this is $120 billion out of it. it does not make sense to me that when we're trying to improve health care, we are going to take $500 billion out of medicare. florida seniors do not want that. then we are going to raise taxes. we are going to raise $500 billion in taxes. and then we will increase medicaid so that states like florida will eventually have to play a couple of billion dollars more in medicaid. what has occurred to me, i

cannot tell you that i have read every word on 2000 som pages, but we have been combing through it and what it will do is increase the cost of health care for the 170 million americans who have health insurance, and for seniors, it will lower the quality of health care. i am afraid that at the end of the day, where we will be in 5- 10 years from now is that this is medicaid for the masses. we will turn medicare into medicaid and we will put everybody on a government run for government regulated program. that is not health care reform. we are supposed to care about quality. we are supposed to care about access. we are supposed to care about cutting costs. i do not think that this bill does anything to address those problems. tonight matters. this is not a good start. we should start over.

we are willing to work through thanksgiving and through december and through christmas and whatever it takes to do it right. my constituents that i meet with, and i was speaking with them, and i had folks from all walks of life come out and speak with me. i had a janitor, to me and ask what would happen with the health care bill. i said that we would be debating it over the next weeks. he said that i should not vote for it, it is a bad thing. it is not just one group of society that likes it or dislikes it. the calls i have gotten in my office, we have gotten nearly 950 calls on this proposal, more than 800 are against it. we need to start over and we need to do it right. >> >> why the opposition to starting debate?

>> the law over 95%, when we have approved a bill that is ultimately approved. you have watched a number of our democratic friends try to twist themselves into a pretzel saying that they really are not voting for the bill. that is not what the american people think. they think that beginning this debate is a vote on the bill. let me also say that those that are telling you that they want to change the bill, the best opportunity to have changed the bill was at the beginning. to deny the majority leader the vote that he needs to start the build would have been powerful. any senator that is truly interested in making a change, whether it is on abortion language or whether the government should go into the insurance business, that was the

time of night -- natural leverage to rid a vote for this proposal tonight is evoke for this 2000 page bill but you see before us -- tonight is a vote for this 2000 page bill that you see before us. >> what is your view on the immigration related elements of this bill? >> i think that most americans feel that this government program ought to be limited to those of us that our citizens and we are reading through the bill to see if that was achieved. for that to be achieved, there has to be some way to verify that you are a citizen and we will have more to say about that later after we clear -- after we

are clear on what decision is made. >> can you give us a sense on how you plan to move forward? i know that you want this to be an extended debate, but how will you even begin the process. >> i have discussed that and i think we will probably go forward with rotating back and forth on amendments he has indicated to me that he understands that the american people expect us to have an extensive debate with many amendments. if we did anything less than that, the american people would storm the capital. as senator byrd pointed out, we already know how they feel about it. the american people do not want us to pass this bill. if they believe that we are

rushing it that we are denying opportunities to change it, i think there will be even -- i think they will be even more enraged. i am confident that he anticipates that we will have a free-wheeling wide open process. assuming he has his 60 votes and it appears that he does, we will be ready to get started on amendments on november 30. >> do you expect the same type of agreements that we have seen in the past or will there be an effort on your part? >> anyone center campus in a 60 vote situation. -- any one senator can put us in a 60 the situation. but there also might be motions to waive the budget and this

sort of thing. as is often the case in the senate, many of the amendment votes are votes that we cast that will be in a 60 boat contest. >> -- a 62 boat contest -- a 60 vote contest. >> [inaudible] i am not sure i understood your question. if 60 senators decide to go forward, we will obviously try to change it in the amendment process. >> you said that this is a vote for the bill. that sounds to me like you're acknowledging the entire package. >> most of the time, when we proceed on a bill, the bill

ultimately passes. there are a number of democrats that say that they did not interpret their vote in favor of proceeding on the bill that way. they will have a chance to see if that is true. it will be a lengthy process before some point in late december or mid january or there will be an opportunity to have 60 votes again to see if the senate wants to terminate the process. of the battle has just begun -- the battle has just begun. i would not put much significance in their vote tonight. all options are still open. >> do you feel that they are malleable or which do not even bother to pressure the senators? >> the american people are asking us to stop this bill and we will do anything and everything we can to prevent

this measure from becoming law. so, in that sense, it's 60 votes are achieved, it will be the beginning of the debate and at whatever point, we decide to see if there are 60 votes, and in my view, that will be a long time from now. we have a lot of amendments that the american people expect us to try to change. i assure you we are going to try to change it. >> bucs let me say it again. if i were a democrat, i would -- and i were seriously interested in changing this bill, i would say to the majority leader that you will not have my vote and less this is chain store that is changed. if you're serious, deep time to do that would be right now. the power is greatest right now.

he has no margin for error. he has no republican support. if i am a democrat and i am really offended by this 2100 page bill, i would say to the majority leader that you can have my vote just as soon as you fix -- and get rid of the government insurance company or if you fix the abortion language. the time to effect this bill is right now. >> thank you, everyone. >> and now, highlights from the senate health care debate earlier today. ms. landrieu: mr. president? the presiding officer: the distinguished senator from louisiana. ms. landrieu: thank you, mr. president. i first want to commend my colleague on the floor, senator cantwell, the senator from washington state, that's worked so hard and so long and in such

a professional way. and she's been extremely helpful to me through this process, and i want to acknowledge that and thank her. i also, before i make this statement, mr. president, want to complement about a few other colleagues that have been extremely helpful and supportive, not just to me but, i think, to the entire senate. beginning with senator harry reid, our leader, who with patience and persistence and care has led to a bill that is before the senate. the question today is whether we should proceed. i would like to say that there are probably, in my view, maybe no other member of the senate could have accomplished what he has today, and i think many senators share my thoughts and belief. number two, i want to recognize

the extraordinary work of a senator from oregon, senator ron wyden, who two years ago, before the process of election of a president really significantly got under way, before it was really ever clear it i as to who might win, he put down a bill called the healthy americans act, which i was very proud to support -- and still am so proud of his effort today -- that had the support of almost seven republicans and seven democrats, a truly bipartisan effort, that would accomplish, in my view, what many americans are asking for: a marketplace that's fixed and reformed, more choices, affordable choices for individuals and small businesses and families, and a real effort to curb the rising and alarming

cost to the federal taxpayers, given that the percentage now of our g.d.p. spent on health care is almost exceeding 16%, twice as high as any nation in the world. that is alarming, and that bill and that effort went a long way to help frame my thoughts on this debate. i also -- and we're going to continue to work together through this process. i also want to thank senator blanche lincoln, who because of her persistent leadership has pushed and prodded members of this body to give the time necessary for the review that our constituents, whether they are for or against the directions that we're moving, have the time. i have used that time, i think,

very well these last two and a half days. i have been in meetings with economists, on phones with health care experts talking with people from my state as well as from around the nation, and i have used that time well and wisely. and because she pushed for it, many of us received the time we needed and i know she'll be speaking on the floor later today giving her final views on

moving on this department debate should not be construed by the supporters of this current framework. it is a vote to move forward to continue the good and essential and important and imperative work that is under way. after a thorough review of the bill, as i said, over the past 2 1/2 days, which included many likely discussions, i have decided that there are enough significant reforms and safeguards in this bill to move forward, but much more needs to be done. over the past many years, and in the last six months, i have heard from people all across

louisiana, that their insurance premium costs are too high and continue to rise without warning. threatening the financial stability of their families and their businesses. i have also heard the pleas and cries of many people who need coverage, but they cannot find it anywhere within reach of their budgets. through months of public meetings in vfw halls, school gyms and in hospitals and health clinics, from new orleans, it is clear to me that doing nothing is not an option. neither is waiting for this debate to begin to continue and come to some final conclusion.

spirited debate in good faith negotiations in this set have produced a bill that contains some amazing and cutting edge reforms that will, i am hopeful, reduced costs for families and small business while reducing the debt burden of the federal government, but these reforms must be implemented properly and carefully and they must be put in place in a timely fashion. i have been told time after time that in order to remain viable and create the jobs that they want to, and may i say, the jobs that we need them to create, if we are going to work our way out of the recession that we are in, they need affordable health insurance and predictable cost. they would like their cost to be

lowered and i will stay focused like a laser on doing that. but what they also need is predictability, simplicity, and they need to be able to plan so that they can get to their job which is creating jobs and not finding their way through very complicated and limited choices under the current situation. as we all know, small business owners are frequently confronted with impossible choices when an employee's family member gets seriously ill, they can expect choices or they can go to that employee and family members and say that i am sorry, but we need to let you go. here is $1,000 or $2,000 or $5,000, you are on your own, good luck. that is a tragic story, painful

and depressing and it has to stop so, i appreciate the hard work of many business owners and organizations that helped to craft portions of this framework because they have remained at the negotiating table. they did not run and hide. they remained at the table. i am asking them to stay at this table before i discuss the work that needed to be done, i would like to discuss some of the points in this bill that encourage you to move forward. small-business owners, under the current framework of this bill would no longer be confronted with these kinds of all itau costs. this bill prevents insurance companies from escalating their rates after someone gets sick. that will stabilize the amount small businesses will have to pay for their health plans and will allow business owners to do

what they do best, plan smart investments and grow their businesses and then help us grow our economy. in recent years, workers with wages have remained stagnant because employers are paying more and more for health care than we are subsidizing three current tax code, leaving less and less money to pay real wages. that is an important change in this underlying provision. this framework that we are debating would also encourage employers to move away from high-cost benefit plans and increase the amount that working families can take home, as i said. in addition, it would ensure that the majority of louisiana families would pay no more than

10% of their annual income for health care. that is still high, but it is not be -- as high as the projections says 60% of income will have to be spent on health care. while some people still think that 10% of 12% may be too high, it is a lot better than 60%, which is the direction in which we are headed. that is real progress. these reforms are necessary now and are -- are too important for the senate to abandon its work. there is a great deal more work that needs to be done. i would like to mention briefly, because other colleagues are here to speak, just three or four of those and i will submit these for the record.

in order to increase choices for small businesses, we must enhance and expand tax credits that are in this bill for small businesses. particularly those of 25 or less. and if we can expand it, 25-50. current projections are that 96% of all businesses that have more than 100 employees have coverage and it is pretty decent. they have some choices. we need to give those businesses more choices we must give help to the small businesses that are leading the way. in addition, i will continue to fight for 27 million americans that are currently self- employed and every chairman, both republican and democrat, i

understand for the past 25 years, has asked for this to be addressed. it is time to make progress on that now. . . to find a better and bipartisan

solution for this issue. i have suggested that a freestanding premium-supported, competitive community option which would trigger on a date certain along the language that senator snowe has been advocating now for many months. if our private market reforms fail to work might be a possible compromise. but because i'm hopeful we can make progress on each of these concerns and others, as well as i believe in an open and transparent debate on the senate floor, i believe that debate is in order. i stand ready to work together with my colleagues to fashion the principal and hopefully bipartisan compromise in the end to achieve what many people in my state need, what many americans want, and which we, madam president, really have to do our best to try to give them.

i know that my time is up, but i would like to ask a personal privilege for just one more minute to address an issue that has come up, unfortunately, in the last 24 hours by some very partisan republican bloggers, so i need to respond i think and will do so now. one of the provisions in the framework of this bill that i have just decided to move on to debate has to do with fixing a very difficult situation that louisiana is facing and any other state that might have a catastrophic disaster, let's hope they don't like we did in 2005. i'm not going to review the morors of korean and rita and the levees broke. and the courts have just ruled that the corps of engineers was responsible and we'll hear about that later. in 2005 louisiana experienced

two of the worst natural disasters in recent memory. in an effort to aid the recovery, congress stepped in with a massive aid package for louisianaians. thank you, that infused grant dollars and director assistance. some of these one-time recovery dollars, in addition to the increased economic activity, were calculated into our state's per capita income. the result, madam chair, has been that louisiana's per capita income -- >> time has expired. >> may i ask for one additional minute? >> without objection. >> the result, madam chair, is that louisiana's per capita income was ab normally inflated. you can understand that. there were billions of dollars that came in from insurance and from road home and community development block grant. in addition, labor and wage costs went up because there was a constriction in the market which any economist can tell you always happens after a natural disaster. as a result, when we did the

calculation under the law, it made us seem as if we were connecticut and not louisiana, like we had some kind of time overnight become rich. that is not the case, madam president, our state is still as poor as it was, if not poorer. i am not going to be defensive about asking for help in this situation, and it is not a $100 million fix, it's a $300 million fix. and it is the number one request of my governor who is a republican. and it is unanimously supported by every member of our delegation, democrat, and republican. i'm proud to have asked for. it i'm proud to have fought for it, and i will continue to. that is not the reason i am moving to debate. the reason i'm moving to debate as expressed in this statement and in hundreds of statements and speeches i have given over the last year or two on this subject which should be self-explanatory. soma dam president, i thank my colleagues for their

graciousness. i know i have gone a little bit over my time but i wanted to get that on the record. on this debate and look forward to working withimous consent the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mrs. lincoln: thank you. thank you, madam president. madam president, i've asked for this time not only today to address thigh colleagues in this body but to -- not only today to address my colleagues in this body but to speak to my constituents in arkansas. after many months on health care, we're nearing yet another important step in a very deliberative process. today we are voting on whether to continue to discuss how to improve health care in america or to@@@@@@ >> many others as well who have worked hard on this issue. over the last several decades,

the advance of medical technologies and our nation's changing demographics have placed new demands on our health care system that is not -- that it's not designed to meet. our vote later this evening is not the first step towards making the necessary adjustments in health care nor will it be the last without a doubt. the finance committee on which i serve and which has led so abley by my good friend from montana, chairman baucus has produced what i still describe as the most responsible approach to health insurance reform. we deliberated for more than 22 months, incorporating recommendations from experts all across our great nation and proved that our bill, that america through our bill that america can achieve unprecedented health insurance reform that expands coverage, reduce cost and provide stability for those with existing coverage. we accomplished these goals without posing long-term risk

for taxpayers. it was not a perfect bill. we never see perfect bills around here, quite frankly, but i can honestly say that i will fight hard so that our final product will be more closely resembling the common sense deficit-reducing plan we produce in the senate finance committee. at times like this, i think it is very important for each of us to remember the very reasons that we began this debate all together. small businesses, madam president, working families are reaching the breaking point financially because of the relentless rise in health care costs. nationally, our economic recovery will only be slowed by the inflationary cost of health care. taxpayers and the insured are already bearing the cost of medical treatment for the uninsured at the most expensive point of delivery in our emergency rooms.

health care in america today is a model that waits until people get sick rather than focusing on the wellness, prevention, and good management of illness that keeps people out of the hospital and from having the most costly care needs. our current health care system wasted money and is so inefficient that the united states spends more than twice as much per person while insuring a smaller portion of our population than the average spending in 29 other industrialized nations. there simply aren't enough health insurance options available to most americans today when in at least 17 states including my home state of arkansas, only one insurance company controls more than half the insurance market. in at least 22 states, still only two carriers control half of the market or more. patients and doctors, madam

president, are routinely making treatment decisions with little or no objective information about which treatments are most effective. american capitalism is based on choice and competition because when these elements are present, consumers can most always find the best value for their money. that's not true in health care. so by creating health insurance exchanges through which small businesses and individuals can choose from a manu of private plans, we can -- menu of private plans, we can enhance cost transparency, create head-to-head competition and allow market forces to reduce prices. these are facts. these are facts, madam president, and whether we are republicans or democrats or independents, i believe that we can agree on most all of them. i know that the great majority of argasns believe these facts

and want to see us accomplish these reasonable goals. for months now, groups outside my state have assigned various motives to my deliberations on health care and tried to define the meaning of my vote. according to the last tally, there has been more than $3.3 million worth of media ads that have been purchased in my home state of arkansas by groups from outside of our state, certainly none by me, and most with my name in the ad. still, madam president, i have continued to approach this issue like i always do. these outside groups seem to think that this is all about my re-election. i simply don't think they know me very well. i am focused on my opportunity to influence the final version of health care reform legislation in a way that most help my state.

that's why the people of arkansas sent me here. they sent me here because they know that i am going to work hard to do the best job possible and to do the right thing, to stand my ground and my principals. i have avoided the extremist claims from the left and from the right and tried to pull the common sense solutions from among all of the policy options so that we get health care reform that benefits arkansasans and all americans. that's our job in this body, madam president, to represent our state in this unbelievably historic body, the united states senate. the truth is this issue is very complex. there is no easy fix and it's imperative that we build on what is already working for health care in america and not turn away from the problems that we face. we keep building upon what we truly can say one day that all

american citizens will have access to quality and affordable health care. in order to improve upon and build upon what we already have, i do not support the creation of a so-called robust government-administered public plan. i believe that we should work to make sure that we do not expose american taxpayers and the treads ri to long-term risk that could occur over future government bailouts of a public plan. rather than create an entirely new government-run health plan to compete with private insurers, i support health insurance reform that focuses on changing the rules of our existing employer-based private health insurance system. i believe we should change the current rules that permit insurance companies to bully their customers and cherrypick healthy patients so we can force them to compete with each other. madam president, my first loyalties are with the people

of arkansas, not insurance companies, the health care industry, or my political party. in fact, i authored an amendment during consideration of legislation in the senate finance committee which limits taxpayers disease for health insurance companies that -- sub si des for health insurance companies that pay their executives high salaries. it should insure that they aren't windfalls and receiving tax breaks while at the same time profiting from government requirement on consumers to buy insurance. the reason we are having this vote, madam president, is because our republican colleagues object to beginning debate in consideration of amendments on health care legislation. although i don't agree with everything in this bill, i have concluded that i believe it is more important that we begin

this debate to improve our nation's health care system for all americans rather than just simply drop the issue and walk away. that is not what people sent us here to do. attempts by the national republican party and other conservative groups to portray this as a vote for or against this particular health care reform bill is untrue, and it's deliberately misleading. the vote tonight will mark the beginning of consideration of this bill by the full u.s. senate, not the end. the republicans have sought to revive their political party by opposing any real solution to our nation's health care crisis. in fact, madam president, this vote for or against the procedure that allows us to begin open debate on health care reform is nothing more and nothing less.

put simply, those who vote yes on this vote believe that our nation's health care system needs reforming and they are ready, ready to have an honest and open debate on the floor of the united states senate about how to best achieve that reform. i'm not afraid of that debate nor am i afraid of coming before this body to say what i believe is the most important thing we can do to reform health care in this country. i hope none of us are. our country needs us too desperately now to be making good decisions and moving forward. i will not allow my decision on this vote to be dictated by pressure from my political opponents for the liberal interest groups from outside arkansas that threaten me with their money and their political opposition. the multitudes of emails and ads that we have received,

unbelievable types of threats about what they're going to do and how they're going to behave. the fact is, madam president, i am serious about changing our health care system as most arkansans and most americans are. i'm not with those who seek to avoid the debate or use political attacks to achieve their narrow goals. i will vote in support of cloture on the motion to proceed to this bill. but, madam president, let me be perfectly clear. i am opposed to a new government-administered health care plan as a part of comprehensive health insurance reform, and i will not vote in favor of the proposal that has been introduced by leader reid as it is written. i am along with others expect to have legitimate opportunity to influence the health care

reform legislation that is voted on by the senate later this year or early next year. i am also aware that there will be additional procedure votes to move this process forward that will require 60 votes prior to conclusion of the floor debate. i have already alerted the leader and i'm promising my colleagues that i'm prepared to vote against moving to the next stage of consideration as long as a government-run public option is included. the public option as a part of health insurance reform has attracted far more attention than it deserves. while cost projections show that it may reduce costs somewhat, those projections don't take into account who pays if it fails to live up to expectations. if in fact premiums don't cover the cost of the public plan, it is taxpayers in this country

who are faced with the burden of bailing it out. madam president, our colleagues, we simply cannot ignore the growth in the federal government since the year 2000. i can assure you that the american people have not ignored it. according to the american institute for economic research, government spending grew by 55% under president bush. and as he was leaving office, government launched a massive bailout of wall street. then it was the domestic auto manufacturing industry that needed taxpayer funds to survive. and finally, in order to revive a dying economy, it took a government economic recovery package to save or create hundreds of thousands of jobs. madam president, we can argue about the necessity of these unprecedented steps, but we need not argue about the impression they have made on the american people.

we should be stopping the growth of government, not expanding it more. without the public option, we can still force private insurance plans that participate in the exchanges to provide standard benefit packages that are easy to compare and more fairly priced. we will be bringing millions of new customers to the exchanges so insurers should be motivated to lower their prices and be competitive. i have appreciated the dialogue with leader reid regarding my concerns that remain about this bill, and i look forward to continuing that dialogue on improvements that i feel like are necessary in order to meet the challenge. i'll be asking my colleagues to consider these additional important changes that i believe will improve our chances for real health insurance reform that can also enjoy the support of most arkansans and i believe most americans. some of these include does the legislation remain deficit

neutral, now and in the future, and curbs future cost, that it protects medicare beneficiaries for seniors and installs insolvency of the medicare program that it improve accessibility and affordability for employees and owners of small businesss and the self-employed through access to health insurance exchanges and tax credits, that it enhance choice and competition of health insurance plans for small businesses and individuals without the inclusion of a government-run public option. and, madam, president, that it build our nation's health care workforce and insure continued access to quality health care providers, ends in rural america. today i know that i will ultimately be held accountable by my constituents in arkansas for my votes, all of my votes on health care, not the national republican senatorial committee, not by other groups from outside my state that

continue to engage in the conversation that they have begun. i know that my decision to support the upcoming cloture vote on the motion to proceed is not my last nor only chance to have an impact on health care reform. in conclusion, madam president, i am optimistic and encouraged about the step we are preparing to take in the senate to amend and craft a bill that will improve access to quality affordable coverage options for the residents and businesses of my state who desperately need relief, a bill that improves the quality and efficiency with which we deliver health care in america all without adding to our nation's deficit and while lowering the cost of health care over the long term. i am committed to using every power of my office to achieve success on this issue by enacted needed reforms that will benefit the people of arkansas and our nation. i have spent the last couple

months in a passionate dialogue with my constituents about health care reform. it wasn't just town hall meetings. i have heard hundreds of conversations with many of them in groups and one-on-one conversations. they may not be in agreement about solutions, but i can assure my colleagues that each person i speak with and i speak to expects us to roll up our sleeves and get this right. we can. following the vote tonight, the bill that will be laid before us will not be the only possible solution. i know that my decision to support the cloture vote on the motion to proceed, again, is not my last or only chance to have an impact on overall health care reform and my strongest hope is that each of us in this body, madam president, can lay political fortunes aside and make the tough common sense choices that our constituents expect of us. whether you're a democrat or a

republican, look at what we face in the challenges of our nation and make sure that as we are working towards an end result that each of us is working as hard as we can to come up with the pragmatic solutions that our constituents expect of us. we may not get this opportunity again in our lifetime. today, madam president, i am thinking about the arkansas working family that can't pay their mortgage because their sick child's medical bill. i'm thinking of the arkansas small business owner who told me that more than 20% of the cost of running his business now goes to health insurance for him and his workers. and i'm thinking about the 450,000 arkansans who have no health insurance. i'm not thinking about my re-election, the legacy of a president or whether democrats or republicans are going to be able to claim victory in winning this debate. i hope all of my colleagues join me in looking forwards to

working with the leader -- looking forward to working with the leader and all of our colleagues in the days and weeks ahead as we strive to solve a problem whose solution is long overdue. thaning officer: the republican leader's recognized. mr. mcconnell: mr. president, the nation is watching the senate tonight. the american people know how important this vote is.@ @ @ @&! will stand. is vote is.@ @ @ @&! this bill itself is a massive monument to bureaucracy and spending.

but at its core, it's really quite simple. at a moment when more than one out of 10 working americans is looking for a job, at a time when the chinese are lecturing us about our debt, this bill, this bill right here, costs $2.5 trillion the government doesn't have. and it cannot afford. it imposes punishing taxes on almost everyone. it raises health insurance premiums on the 85% of

americans who already have health insurance. and if that were not bad enough, it slashes medicare by half a trillion dollars. nine who votes aye tonight, mr. president, is voting for all of these things. now, mr. president, it is a fact, a vote in favor of proceeding to this bill is a vote in favor of adding to the tax burden of the american people in the midst of double-digit unemployment. a vote in favor of proceeding with this bill is a vote to raise health insurance premiums on people who were told -- they

were told that they could expect their health insurance costs to go down. a vote in favor of proceeding to this bill is a vote in favor of deep cuts to medicare for tens of millions of seniors. they depend on it totally. a vote to proceed to this bill is a vote to continue the completely out-of-control spending binge that congress has been on all year. a vote in favor of this bill tells every american family sitting in a waiting room tonight wondering when they'll get to see a doctor how how much it's going to cost. it's not our concern.

and worst of all, a vote in favor of this bill is a vote in favor of the spending binge that is leading to a massive and unsustainable long-term debt that will shackle our children to a future they can't afford. that's what tonight's vote is all about. if it wasn't, none of us would be here on a saturday night with the nation watching and waiting to see what we do here. they're watching because they know that none of this, none of this is inevitable. all it takes is one vote, just one. the simple math is this. if there were one democrat,

just one of our friends on the other side of the aisle, just one who would say no tonight, none of this would happen. the voices of the american people would be heard. we have seen all the surveys. we know how they feel. if just one democrat were to say no tonight, he would be saying no to the premium increases, no to the tax cuts, no to the medicare cuts, just one on the other side of the aisle. and then we could start over with a common sense step by step approach to fix the problem that got us here in the first place and that was that health care costs too much. now, mr. president, the sad

irony of this whole debate, the problem that got us here is that health care costs are out of control. and yet the neutral nonpartisan congressional budget office, the score keeper around here, says that under this bill, this massive bill, health care costs are actually going to go up, not down. and the american people thought that's what this whole debate was about in the first place. so 274 pages and trillions of dollars later, 274 pages and trillions of dollars later, this bill doesn't even meet the basic goal that the american people had in mind and what they thought this debate was

all about to lower costs. this bill will actually make the situation worse. and now we're about to vote on it. now, we have heard some senators come to the floor today and say that they oppose this bill but they don't want to stop the debate. they oppose the bill but they don't want to stop the debate. mr. president, nobody is suggesting we stop the debate. no one. not a single senator on this side of the aisle have i heard suggest that we stop the debate . but if we don't stop this bill tonight, the only debate we'll be having -- the only debate we'll be having is about higher

premiums, not savings for the american people, higher taxes instead of lower costs and cuts to medicare rather than improving seniors care. that's what the debate will be about. now the american people and 40 of us in this room sitting on this side of the aisle are not asking to end the debate. that's not what we have in mind to end the debate. what we want to do is change the debate, not end it, change it. once we get on this bill, ladies and gentlemen, the basic dimensions will not change. the basic dimensions will not change.

so i ask why should we consider a bill we already know the american people oppose? this is not anything anybody is in doubt about. the american people think if you don't like this bill, you got an obligation to try to stop it. and that opportunity will come at 8:00. now i'm sure this won't come as a surprise to any member of the senate, but it's going to take 60 votes to change this bill. that means the bill is introduced, this thing we're looking at right here, will fundamentally be the bill we'll be asked to pass sometime in the future. that is a fact.

after tonight's vote, we'll all go home and face our constituents. we'll have to tell them how we voted on raising their premiums , raising their taxes, and cutting their medicare. for some of us, that's not going to be a very easy conversation, but it doesn't have to be that way. if you really want to lower costs and premiums, then we can work together step by step and pass the common sense reforms the american people have been asking for all looping -- along. we can end junk lawsuits

against doctors and hospitals which drive up costs. we can encourage healthy choices like prevention and wellness programs which hold down costs. we can lower costs by letting consumers buy coverage across state lines. we can allow small businesses to band together to get lower insurance rates. and certainly we can address the rampant, absolutely rampant waste, fraud, and abuse that drive up costs. all of those, my colleagues, are changes worth making. the american people are looking at the senate tonight. they're hoping we say no to

this bill so we can start on a better plan that pictures the problem that the american people care about most and that is cost. they want us to start over. there is nothing about this massive bill that they like. they want us to start over. they want us to address their real concerns. all it would take, mr. president and my colleagues, is just one member on the other side of the aisle, just one to give us an opportunity not to end the debate, but to change the debate in the direction the american people would like us to go. i yield the floor.

>> my dear friend, republican leader, has had since wednesday to read this bill. obviously he hasn't done so because the facts he is talking about do not exist except in the mind of a few people who don't understand this legislation. now, mr. president, for 200 years we have styled ourselves the world's greatest deliberative body. declaration necessarily implies discussion and great issues. they have great debate. today we vote on whether even to discuss one of the greatest issues of our generation, indeed one of the greatest issues this body has ever faced. whether this nation will finally guarantee its people the right to live free from fear of illness and death which can be prevented by decent health care for all. in the coming weeks, we'll finally put people, not insurance companies, in charge

of their lives. the road to this point has been started many times. it has never been complete. there has been an enormous undertaking and we would not be in the position without the unflagging dedication of many senators and extremely loyal staff members. the top of the list are chairman baucus and dodd who have shown dedication, determination in recent weeks and months that's rarely been seen. i am proud of every single senator's input and especially proud of the two most recent classes of slearts elected with strong mandates for progress, they have demonstrated a stewedious approach to our endeavor and unwavering belief that all americans should be able to live a healthy life. mr. president, i want to explain why we're holding this important vote at this hour. as a matter of principal that i respect, the senior senator

from arkansas insisted that we vote only after senators had the time to read and understand this bill. senators all have now had ample time to do so and that is because of the chairman of the agriculture committee, senator blanche lincoln of arkansas. mr. president, as i have done many times this year, privately and personally as well as publicly, i again invite my colleagues, my republican colleagues join on the right side of history. i again invite them to join us at the very least in a debate about our future. around dining room tables in nevada and across the nation, families are agonizing over what to sacrifice next to buy health insurance. they're questioning whether to fill a prescription or go without it and hope for the best. employers are wondering whether they can afford to provide health care to their employees. they're asking how their businesses can survive while

health care costs go faster than ever. americans need health insurance reform. debate is constant between television commentators, the editorial pages of great newspapers and magazines, but, mr. president, the only place where silence is even considered is here in the united states senate. now, tonight, finally, we have the opportunity to bring this debate where it belongs, we finally have the opportunity to bring this great deliberation to this great deliberative body, that and nothing more is what tonight's vote does. a yes vote says to america i know this issue is important to your family and to our country and the senate should at the very least talk about it. let's be real transparent. beyond all the hype, hyperbole and the hyperventilation, that and nothing more is what tonight's vote does. a yes vote says to america, i know the issue is important to your family and to our country and the senate should at least

talk about it. mr. president, some of my republican friends would like the american people to think that voting to debate the bill is voting to pass the bill. any high school civics textbook will tell you the suggestion is absolutely false. tonight's vote is not the end of the debate. it's only the beginning of the debate. it's clear by now that my republican colleagues have no problem talking about health care, radio interviews, television interviews, press conferences, little town hall meetings. my distinguished counterpart, the republican leader, has given many speeches in this chamber on the issue of health care reform, yet now that we have the actual legislation to debate, to amend, to build on, now that we have a plan on paper and not just wild rumors will they refuse to debate? after all, if we're not

debating, if we refuse to let the senate do its job, what are we doing here? if senators refuse to debate about a profound crisis affecting every single citizen, the nation must ask, what do you fear? and whose voice do you speak? in whose interest do you vote? surely deliberating health reform can't be more difficult than deciding as americans have to do whether to pay your mortgage or to pay your medical bills? it can't be more painful than not taking your child to the doctor because it costs too much it can't be more humbling than facing your own employees and telling them, i'm sorry, you can't count on me for your health insurance next year. you're on your own. and it can't be more upsetting than having an insurance company take away your coverage at the exact moment you need it

the most. my republican friends, there is nothing to fear and debate. president kennedy once said and i quote, "let us not be afraid of debate or discussion. let us encourage it." be not afraid of debate. it's our job. it's what the legislative process is about, discussing, amending, improving. we democrats stand ready to do what needs to be done. we welcome debate. we encourage debate. does any united states senator seriously think the founders concede the senate and its rules in hopes of legislation would never be deliberated? of course not. did the framers of the constitution explicitly enumerate the powers of the senate but in truth hopes this body would avoid the hardest and most urgent questions of the day? of course not. did our nation's visionaries build this building, this capitol building and design this great chamber we stand in

tonight only so it would remain dark and silent? quite to the contrary. imagine if instead of debating either historic g.i. bills, legislation that had given so many brave americans the chance to brave college, this body had stood silent? imagine if instead of debating the bills that created social security or medicare, the senate's voices had been stilled. imagine if instead of debating whether to abolish slavery, instead of debating whether to give women and minorities the right to vote, those who disagreed were muted. discussion was killed. there would be no vote. so i say to my republican senators, don't try to silence the great debate over a great crisis. don't let history show that when given the chance to debate and defend your position to work with us for the good of our country and constituents, you ran and hid? you cannot wish away a great

emergency. by closing your eyes and pretending it doesn't exist. there is an emergency and it exists and it exists now. the right response to disagreement is not dismissle. it's discussion. -- dismissal. it's discussion. democracy is discussion. democracy needs deliberation. let us debate our differences. on some we'll find common ground. on others we may not. but let's at least tell america if the legislators of the united states senate is willing to find that we can come together. nobel prize awardy andre sokoro v knew that when opposing sides come together, the sum of its ideas can out weigh its parts. "profound thoughts only arise in debate with the possibility of counterargument." so come on, my friends. let us share our ideas here in

the united states senate. let us legislate. let us negotiate. let us deliberate. let us debate. our country tries for this debate. our country deserves this debate. our country needs this debate. >> mr. president, i would notice the absence. >> the clerk will call the role . mr. reid: mr. president? the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. reid: i would ask unanimous consent the call of the quorum be terminated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: i would ask unanimous

consent that the senators vote tonight from their desks >> the senate went on to approve the motion to move the health care vote forward. shortly after the vote, senate democrats held a news conference. it lasted about 10 minutes. >> senator baucus wanted me to express that he is headed back for montana. his mom is still not doing real well, and he won't be here tonight. i of course commend those senators who showed tonight that they shouldn't be afraid to debate. this is the united states

senate. and the two senators that led the way in this whole process and debate are standing with me tonight. we're sorry max baucus isn't here, but there are elements of this bill that senator dodd has worked on for years, issues that you have worked on for many, many years are now part of this legislation that is now before the senate. we can see the finish line now, but we're not there. we haven't yet crossed that and that's an understatement. the road ahead is a long stretch, but we can see the finish line. we have the momentum that is going to keep this process moving. i have no doubt. we know that not all 100 senators agree on how to move forward, but everyone agrees that we must move forward. we know not all 60 senators in my caucus agree on every aspect of this bill, but they agree on

the vast, vast majority, probably more than 90% for sure. but all democrats do believe now is the time to make sure all americans have access to affordable health care. when this debate begins on the floor, the differences will be clear to the american people. they'll see our plan. they have had since wednesday to look at it. they'll see more. our plan saves lives, saves money, and saves medicare. they'll see the rental terntiff which i'm sorry to say is nonexistent. so obviously, it keeps our broken system just the way it is and lets it get even worse. we're really happy with this bill. we welcome a debate on this bill to build upon it. we look forward to finally bringing quality health care to the american people that they

deserve since the first days of harry truman. it was a long time since 1945 when he wrote that letter to us, but it's a time that must begin and it has begun now. we're going to move forward on this get quality health care for all americans. senator dodd. >> you have said it all and again my congratulations to leader reid for keeping us all together over these past many months, to max baucus who has done a great job on the finance committee, a very difficult part of this bill. as i mentioned earlier and it will be constantly on all of our minds, ted kennedy who made this the cause of his life. and last year -- >> chris, i just spoke to vicky kennedy. she of course was in tears and she believed that ted is watching us. >> i have a feeling he is. we got a lot of work cut out for us in the coming weeks. but tonight as americans watch this vote as many did, we have

a historic opportunity to get this done. and it will not be easy, i know that. we have a lot of work in front of us. at long last we're going to have a debate that is long overdue. this is the 21st century. and the fact that so many of our fellow citizens, even with insurance worry about its stability. those are underinsured wondering if there is an adequate amount of coverage for them should that kind of crisis befall them and the millions that have no coverage whatsoever, this is a critical moment. it's the united states of america. and certain things you ought to have a right to. certain things, not everything, just certain things. one thing is certain. you ought to have a right to decent health care, to be able to see a doctor when you need it and to be able to afford it without bankrupting you in the process. that's with a we're attempting to do with this bill. that's what we're attempting to do for the very first time in the history of our country to deal with a national health care plan that will serve all

of the people of our nation. nothing less than is our objective. a long road lines ahead of us. we have begun that journey. i am as confident that as i stand before you this evening with our leader, with tom harkin who did a remarkable job with this on our committee that we're going to accomplish that goal. before this journey is over, we will have passed national health care coverage for all americans. >> chairman harkin. >> i cannot they've a better vote to have right before thanksgiving. i think the american people when they really learn what's in this bill will be very thankful that we're moving ahead. and make no mistake about it, this is a momentous vote that we had here tonight. a pivotal vote. as we move ahead in the didn't and the amending process, the american people will learn more and more about what's in this bill. this bill is a good deal for

america. it reduces the deficit, it will cover along with medicare 98% of the people in this country. it will crack down and stop a lot of health insurance industry abuses and it will, for the first time, provide enormous support for prevention and wellness to keep people healthy in the first place, to change the paradigm away from a sick care system to a true health care system in america. that's what this bill is all about. we're rounding third and heading home. as our leader said, it's a long way sometimes from third to home, but we're going to get there. and i just want to thank our leader, senator reid, for all that he has done. i said today, i said he has the patience of job, the wisdom of solomon and the endurance of sampson in putting this together. and i thank chris dodd for his great leadership in getting

this bill through the committee and also senator baucus, for his great leadership on the finance committee. we hope that his mother is going to be fine and they'll have a good thanksgiving together. so now onward and let's get this bill done and get it to the president for his signature. >> we'll take a couple questions. >> senator lincoln made it clear she is not going to support a public option, will it be in the final bill? >> i support a strong public option. welcome senator schumer, lander and carper who senator lander said they're working together to find a public option that is acceptable to all democrats. >> leader, you must be wondering as all of us are when you might get 60 votes on this? >> that's a simple question and answer. it will get 60 votes and we're

going to have a bill we want to send to the president. >> the votes must be more and more important -- >> did you just say you had senator schumer -- >> no, it's my understanding that senator lander said she was is working with senator schumer and carpenter to come up with an alternative. >> what can we do now to help the deficit? >> i was focused on getting the votes, i wasn't talking to -- i talk all senators' calls but no one else's. >> earlier you have spoken with senator kennedy's widow? >> she called right after the vote. i will remember the call always. she was crying pretty hard and we both said ted would be happy . i told -- and he would write me

as he did one of his little letters and we both felt that he is watching what took place tonight. >> senator, did you speak to her in the cloakroom? >> yes. >> is history on your side? does it work for you? is the weight of history on your side? does it help you in rounding up the votes? >> i'm a historian. i have written a history book. i love history. i'm in the process now of reading -- i have read it once, durant's history of civilization. i'm starting over on that. i really do believe that we're -- this is a historic time in the history of our country. i do believe that this has been far too long in the making and we as we have heard from senator dodd and senator harkin tonight and i believe it fervently, we're going to get health care reform. the american people need it and

deserve it. think about this. last year 750,000 americans filed for bankruptcy. over half of them filed for bankruptcy because of health care costs and more than half of those that had bankruptcy because of health care costs had insurance. so this -- our great country can't let this go on. thank you very much, everybody. >> and now remarks from senators orrin hatch, sam brownback and mike johan dealing with provisions of abortion in the health care bill. this last an hour. >> i would express my deep concerns on senator rises's bill on two critical issues. these aren't the only things i'm critical about but i want to dwell on two of them. conscious clause, protections for medical providers oppose to abortion.

as you can see, the -- the stupak compromise amendment, which was supported by 64 house democrats and -- and a huge majority of republicans, no funds authorized or appropriated by this act may be used to pay for abortion or to cover any part of the health plan that includes coverage of abortion. that's tall says. it should be abundantly clear to each member of the body that the house of representatives passed pro-life language exactly two weeks ago marketedly different from that contained in the reid proposal. the house provisions in contrast to the terribly flawed provisions in the reid bill contain language that would not only safeguards the rights of the unborn, but also prevent medical providers from adopted by a significant margin, 240 to 194.

th house of representatives including 25% of the democratic caucus. even more telling is happens to be two polls released this week from the "washington post," abs news and cnn. they confirmed that 61% of the american population do not support federal funding for abortion. this vote should serve as a strong signal to each member of the senate that these protections cannot be ignored and must be contained in any measure that we adopt here. unfortunately the language in the reid bill explicitly allows what the other language would prevent. the reid language authorizes abortion in the government-operated health plan or the public option and federal sub si des for insurance coverage that includes abortion. .

>> we should never purple -- force -- every appropriations bill since 2004. it also was included in the house passed bill garrido of my amendments were defeated. i notice my two colleagues are on the floor. i would like to ask both of

them what is wrong with including the stupak-pets language in rebuild? >> i first want to thank you for offering these amendments in committee. in both committees, you said in here let's put in the hyde language, and both times and the amendments were competed -- defeated in committee. proponents of the rebuilt will tell us the the abortion funding language is essentially the hyde language. that is plain wrong. let me tell you why. the rebuilt trust to explain this contradiction by calling for the segregation of federal

dollars when federal subsidies are used to purchase health plans. the segregation of funds actually violate the hyde amendment, which prohibits funding of abortion not only by federal funds but also by state matching funds within the same plan. simply put, federal and state medicaid dollars are not segregated, and the read bill specifically authorizes something that the hyde amendment specifically rejects. >> senator hatch, if i might join in here, i think it is enormously important that we lay a good record here as to what this is all about and why the hyde amendment has been the law of our nation for so long.

>> is specifically prohibits federal dollars being used to pay for abortions except if the pregnancy was the result of rape, incest, or the life of a mother is in danger. the hyde language applies to all forms of the federally funded programs, medicare, medicaid, and federal employees health benefits plan. however, it is important to note that today there is no segregation of federal funds in any federal health-care program, none. for example, the medicaid program receives both federal and state dollars. there is no segregation of either the federal medicaid

dollars or the state medicaid dollars. states that do provide elective abortions for medicaid beneficiaries must do so from a completely different accounts, that is state only dollars. no federal or state dollars from the state medicare program may even be placed in that "stayed only" money. >> that is just an excellent explanation of what hyde is about, and it underscores why we are so upset about the unbelievable expansion that is going to occur if this read bill is passed. you mentioned the federal employees health benefit program. let me take a minute to talk about how that works, because again, i think it underscores the point we are making here today. let me give you an example.

current federal employees health benefits program does this. it has 250 participating health plans. let me emphasize that, 250 participating health plans that do not cover abortion. federal employees pay a share of the costs. the federal government, through tax dollars collected, pays the balance. it is a mixture of federal employees' contribution to their paycheck and the federal government getting the money for tax dollars. federal employees cannot opt for elective abortion coverage, because tax payer dollars are subsidizing the cost of their employee plan. you can see here how we have tried to remain true to the

distinction that you talked about. as many have said during this debate, if it is good enough for federal employees, why isn't it good enough for the rest of the citizens? senator brown back, what is in their read bill that does not -- what is in the reid bill that does not reflect does nothyde which? >> if i could follow up quickly on your last point, i think it is so clear that if we are not going to put this in the federal employees benefit insurance system, we should not put it in this system. yet this is a big expansion that is taking place. i would just note that the democrat health bill would explicitly authorize abortion be covered in the government option, as i stated earlier. also mandates there must be --

this is an enormous expansion, a radical departure from the third year policy that represents the hyde amendment. the abortion language that is included in the bill is a departure. 30 years, bipartisan federal policy prohibiting federal tax dollars paying for elective abortions. as you know, the language in the senate bill specifically authorizes the secretary of health and human services to include abortion in the public option and permits government subsidies for plans that pay for abortion. the caps language in the senate bill contains just a clever accounting gimmick. proponents say it separates private and public funds for abortion coverage. however, it has been proven over and over again by outside reviewers that the caps measure would include both abortion coverage in finding in the government run public option as well as for those plants in the

insurance exchange. represented bart stupak, the democrat from michigan, explain the issue at hand very clearly. he wrote this "the caps amendment, which is the basis of the senate language, departed from hyde in several important in troubling ways, by mandating that at least one plan in the health insurance exchange provide abortion coverage, by requiring a minimum $1 monthly charge for all covered individuals that would go towards paying for abortions and by allowing individuals receiving federal for a bill to credits to purchase health insurance plans that cover a portion. i currently prohibits direct federal funding of abortions. the stupak language is a continuation of the hyde policy, nothing more, nothing less."

i would like to ask senator hatch about this provision, about what we need to talk about in the exchanges and the types of plants that will be included in the exchanges. and about how this is an expansion of the abortion language. >> isn't true that one health plan must be offered in exchange that covers elective abortions? isn't that a departure from current federal policy? >> to be clear, the reid health care reform bill would require one plan to offer elective abortions in each exchange, as you noted. nothing in the reid bill -- if i do not wish to have a plan that covers elective abortions, but all i can afford is that plan, where does that leave me? should my constituents have to

compromise their own moral code in order to receive health care? if they would have to buy a plan that covers abortion. >> today, no federal health program requires the coverage of elective abortions. this is a clear departure from current law. i cannot imagine us forcing people to pay for insurance that covers abortions when it is so unconscionable to so many of the american people. i would also like to make one other point perfectly clear. the compromise amendment would not prohibit the ability of women to obtain elective abortions as long as they use their own money to purchase these policies. i think it is important that we did that piece of it clear as well. >> isn't it true that the stupak amendment passed in the house by a considerable margin allows women to purchase with their own money separate

supplemental health coverage that may include the coverage of elective abortions if they do it with their own money. >> senator hatch, i am glad to raise that issue. yes, that is correct. your understanding is correct. women would be allowed to purchase separate, elective abortion coverage with their own money. b center ack, do you at -- center brown back -- >> it is true that women can purchase separately, with their own money, use their own funds to be able to provide for their own abortion coverage. but what we are saying here today is that we should not have this as part of the federal government. we should not have as part of the federal funding program. we should not be using taxpayer dollars to fund for abortion, as we have not done for 30 years. that has been a long standing

bipartisan program. it is not prohibited that an individual could go ahead and buy the service on their own. >> it is absolutely correct, the stupak language allows women to purchase both a supplement policy for the coverage of selective abortions and a comprehensive health-care plan that includes coverage of elective abortions, as long as they pay for their plan with their own money. it allows that. >> senator hatch, let me just interject something here, because i think this is a very important point to make, following up on what you just said. some say that person would never want to purchase a separate rider to cover abortions. just would not happen, they say. but they misunderstand what the stupak line which actually allows. let me be clear about this. if a woman once our health

insurance plan to provide elective abortion services, she does have the choice to purchase a health-insurance plan that provides that on the exchange. she just has to pay for it with her own money. am i correct in that interpretation, or have i misunderstood? >> that is correct. a woman may purchase with her own funds either a supplemental policy that covers elective abortions, or an entire health plan that includes the coverage of elective abortions. look, a woman has always been able to do that, and frankly, we do not deny her the right to do that. what we say is, taxpayers should not be paying the costs of it. they should not be called upon to pay for elective abortions. >> senator hatch, i would just ask you as somebody who has been in this body for some years and has followed this issue courageously for many years,

what we are asking for, again, is just what has been established since 1977 in this body and in the house. >> that is a fundamental component of the hyde language. i would like now to talk about the conscience clause. to me, this is extremely important. the conscience clause is protection for paramedic -- for medical providers. there are not included in arereid bill. the house adopted language -- including in the appropriations

bill since 2004. this summer, the house energy and commerce committee accepted these protections unanimously during consideration of their bill. let me emphasize that point. unanimously, there was not one objection to it. that means that all members of the committee with ideologies ranging from the chairman, henry waxman, who represents hollywood, california, the ranking republican, it joe barton -- they all recognize the importance of adopting this language. in contrast, the reid bill has stronger protection for abortion providers than for those who have conscious objections to abortion. on one hand, abortion providers may not be discriminated against for performing any abortion anywhere. on the other hand, pro-life providers must cite a

particular moral or religious belief to prevent discrimination. this is narrower than current law. it does not extend the protections to pro-life health plans. a catholic health system that requires a local hospital to stop providing abortions in order to become part of this health system could be accused of discrimination. what is wrong with this picture? don't you think it makes sense to protect health-care providers who have objections of conscience to abortion so that they are not forced to provide abortions? >> absolutely. senator hatch, as you offer this explanation about a catholic health-care provider, it hits right to the heart of this issue. i most certainly agree with you, and i want you to know that

many nebraskan said agree with you and agree with me on this issue. i got a letter recently from a gentleman out in western nebraska. he said this. i urge you to support freedom of conscience, which protect professionals from being forced to participate in abortion and other anti-life practices, which include end of life issues. i had another constituent from the eastern side of nebraska. he said this. i am also very disturbed to learn that health-care workers may be forced to act and speak contrary to their own consciences. i find it shocking to believe that this is being considered within a serious conversation or debate.

we are putting up a chart here. president obama has weighed in on some of these issues. president obama'speechs in a joint session of congress, we all remember that september 9 of this year. he said this. "in one more misunderstanding, i want to clear up, under our plan, no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions. federal conscience laws will remain in place." the president has gone on to stay on multiple occasions that he would not support abortion in health care bill. the president has stated that over and over again. the president has also stated on multiple occasions, both as a candidate and as president, that is his goal to lower the

incidence of abortion. that is what he says. not what the democrat led senate has done relative to this bill, which he has embraced, and is not what the leadership has done on this bill. my colleagues, i see this as a radical abortion approach, a radical piece of language. you can go right to the bill itself, to page 116-124 of this 2007 it for page bill and you can read yourself. there is so much about this bill that is bad policy. this is especially damaging. the president promised us he would not let it happen. did the president and the members of his party who controlled the senate and who

wrote the bill behind doors really believe that abortion is health care? why didn't they just rictus language out? why didn't they adopt the stupak language, which was voted upon in the house, the stupak compromise, and why didn't they adopt that, knowing that 64 democrats had signed on to that language? what do you think about the president's commitment and his promise to us not to use federal dollars to fund abortion? senator brownback, i would like your thoughts. >> i was there when the president was addressing us on health care. i remember vividly sitting there and listening to these words, the ones that you just mentioned. he was very clear, very concise. one more misunderstanding i want to clear up, no federal dollars will be used to fund abortion

and federal conscious laws will remain in place. that is specifically violated in this bill. they had a very simple route to change it. they could have just put the stupak language that has already passed the house, and instead they put in this abortion expansion language. i will show another chart here a little bit later on. the last time we funded abortions here was between 1974 and 1977, before the hyde language in 1977. if we are going back to that policy, medicaid funded as many as 300,000 federal taxpayer dollars -- 300,000 annually. i would ask everybody, pro-

choice or pro-life, do you want your taxpayer dollars to pay for 300,000 abortions a year? i do not think anybody wants to see us do that. president clinton, we all remember very clearly saying often that he wanted to make abortion safe, legal, and rare. adding 300,000 does not do that. so the president took the time in a carefully tailored speech that all of us were at, it was nationally televised during prime time to tell congress the words we have quoted here today and to make that specific promise, and that promise is broken in the reid legislation today. our constituents heard those words, watching the speech at home. i have to believe these are the kinds of broken promises that are making our constituents lose their trust in government.

the fact is, as so many people have pointed out, abortion is very much in this health care bill. the democrats and republicans acknowledge this. if you want to do more than pay lip service of lowering the incidence of abortion, we need to oppose the motion to proceed. since the president clearly stated he did not want to use federal dollars for the funding of abortion, and considering the fact that when federal funding is not available, fewer abortions occur. here is why the hyde amendment is so important. administrators to run the medicaid program funded over 300,000 year. that is almost 1 million abortions paid for by the country's taxpayers out of their pockets.

when the hyde language was not a lot of the land, that was until they hyde amendment was enacted in 1976. the american people disagreed with being forced to pay for abortions. whether pro-choice or poor alike, they did not want taxpayer dollars to pay for this. the commonwealth of massachusetts recently passed a state mandated insurance. they fail to include an explicit exclusion of abortion, so abortion the refunded immediately in massachusetts. according to commonwealth care website, abortion is considered covered under outpatient medical care. the federal government should not go down this road. the president made a commitment to the american people and the democrat led senate has failed

to include that commitment in this bill. they included radical language that will increase the incidence of abortion. senator, don't you think it makes sense to protect health- care providers when we look at that issue here who have objected to conscience -- on objections of conscience to abortion, so they are not forced to provide abortions? >> it absolutely makes sense. one of the things senator hatch and senator brownback that has been very remarkable to me, this bill just came out. it was behind closed doors for weeks and weeks, and came out in the middle of the night. pro-life groups weighed in on this bill immediately. for all the complexity, for all the definitions and varied language, they saw immediately what this bill was all about. pro-life groups across the board have opposed the provisions of

this legislation. no pro-life group has taken the bait. there represent millions of americans across this great country. let me just take a moment and quote from what they have said. the national right to life committee says this. senate majority leader harry reid has rejected the bipartisan stupak-pitts amendment and has substituted completely unacceptable language that would result in coverage of abortion on demand in two big new federal programs. the united states conference of catholic bishops has weighed in. they said this one is the worst bill so far on this issue. "the conference believes the

bill violates the longstanding federal policy against the use of federal funds for elective abortions in health plans that include such abortions. a policy upheld in all health programs covered by the high demand. the federal employee benefit program and now in the house passed a portable america act. we believe legislation that violates this moral principle is not true health care reform and must be amended to reflect it. if that fails, the current legislation should be opposed." the family research council says this. described the legislation as a direct attack on the principles set forth in the hyde amendment over 30 years ago. this bill is one only an

abortionist could love. concerned women for america said the following in a dramatic departure from current policy. "the patient protection and for all care act will provide government funding for elective abortions. overall, this bill raises serious pro-life concerns." senator hatch, you referred to polls. polls indicate a majority of americans do not want their tax dollars paying for elective abortions. according to that cnn opinion research corp., six intent americans favor a ban on the use of federal funds for abortions. they may literally favor -- this

poll indicates that 61% of the public oppose the use of public money for abortions for women who cannot afford the procedure. i have to ask the question, senator hatch, when will we listen to the american people on this important issue? >> have you seen similar polls indicating that a majority of americans do not want their tax payer funds used for paying for elective abortions? have you seen those tadpole's? >> i have. >> we have got letters from our constituents consistently. in poll after poll, you can see what the american people are saying. they do not want their tax dollars to fund abortions. >> that we ask a question to you both. i know that my constituents are

very upset about the possibility of their tax dollars being used to pay for elective abortions. i even brought a few other letters down to the floor so i could read them. can i take a few minutes and do that? >> please do. >> i think these letters, and these are just a few of them. i just thought i would mention a few of these. here is one from a woman ph.d. dear senator, on behalf of americans united for life i write to express our strong opposition of a cent per jennings of majority leader

read's bill. aul action will scholar all modes -- the bill explicitly allows the secretary of of help predict allows federal subsidies to go to private insurance plans that include abortion coverage. in addition, it requires at least one private plan in each exchange provide coverage for all abortions. the passage of a health care reform bill with that language explicitly excluding abortion coverage in funding is unacceptable to pro-life americans. we strongly encourage you to vote against all procedural motions to move the majority leader's bill including cloture on the motion to proceed.

here is another one. this is from one of my personal constituents. as an american with a growing disdain for the heavy handedness and disregard for the wishes of the american people, at valley oppose any plan brought to the table that will require me to pay for abortions with my tax dollars. in a government-run health-care system with this provision is bad for america and violates it the deep convictions of many americans. furthermore, i am infuriated by senate majority leader harry reece to set the course of action in secretly creating his own version of a health care reform plan. his understand -- underhanded tactics lies in the face of our legislative process. i strongly oppose his health- care overhaul plan and any other plan to nationalize our healthcare system. i urge you to oppose any

nationalized health care bill and any plan containing an abortion mandate. here's another one. this is an e-mail to me. it says this. hello, mr. hatch. i am writing for four registered voters in my family. we are very concerned about federal health-care legislation. we believe in bus supports several of our beliefs. we believe that life must be respected and care for from conception to natural death. as such, we do not want any of our tax dollars going to abortion or euthanasia. we support -- we have a desire for the considered discontinue support of the hyde amendment of 1976. we support charities that provide counseling for families who have an unplanned pregnancy. we want to support them in having the baby and caring for themselves and the child. we do this by donating things

that are needed by the mom to be during her pregnancy. we also have donated furniture and other things needed by the baby. these have been given to bertrand, a program supported by donations. we want access to health care for all pre this includes fair treatment of our immigrants. we do not want any of their health care they are receiving right not to be taken from them. in the bible, god tells the jews to be kind to the aliens as they themselves for the aliens at one time in the promised land. please consider their beliefs. whether you agree with every word in these are not, they are interesting. here's another one. during the debate on health care reform, please support an amendment to incorporate longstanding policies against abortion funding and in favor of

conscience rights. if the serious concerns are not addressed, the final bill should be opposed. life should be respected from conception to natural death. i am a retired teacher and hope to be able to receive the care i choose to have until my natural death. i care should not be based on my productivity in society years from now. thank you for your stand on abortion in the past. i parents to not have and do not know how to use a computer to contact you. they feel the same as my husband and i feel about the above issues. here is another one. i am a registered democrat. in favor of health-care reform. i am also committed to protecting the unborn and to safeguarding the conscience of each health care provider who is uncomfortable with providing abortion services. during floor debate on health care reform bill, please support an amendment to incorporate longstanding policies against

abortion funding and in favor of conscience rights. if these serious concerns are not addressed, the final bill should be opposed. genuine health care reform should protect the life and dignity of all people from the moment of conception until natural death." another one: "senator hatch: during floor debate is on the health care reform bill, please support an amendment to incorporate long-standing policies against abortion funding and in favor of conscience rights. if these serious concerns are not drearvetiond the final bill should be opposed. genuine health care reforms should protect the life and dignity of all people from the moment of conception until natural death." i also have a petition to senator orrin g. hatch opposing using "federalist paper" dollars to fund abortion. "own out of every three babies conceive sad rick tim of abortion, a tragedy that has claimed more million innocent lives since the roe v. wade supreme court decision legalizing abortion on demand.

every abortion is a gruesome act that ends an innocent human life and cannot be tolerated in a civil society. the pro-abortion lobby is seeking to hideáán d @ @ 8@ @ i guess i would read a few of those letters and try and set a tone. i have all kinds of letters, but i just picked a few at random. i had not even read them before i came here. >> i was just recently at a veterans day parade in leavenworth kansas and had a

number of people coming up to me opposed to the health care bill. i had one come up to me and say they were in favor of it, and all the rest were opposed. it starts on the basis of this is just fiscally in saying what we are considering doing, which are 12 trillion dollars in debt and adding an entitlement program on top of this, why on earth would you do that? they are scared about what else is in the bill, and then this feature comes up as well. i would add finally, i would ask the chair unanimous consent that this statement be included at the end of our colloquy. if i could have unanimous consent that that would be in at the end of the colloquy. >> without objection, so ordered. >> the catholic bishops issued this yesterday and said this. sadly, the legislative proposal

recently unveiled in the senate does not meet these moral criteria. specifically it violates a longstanding federal policy against the use of federal funds for elective abortions in health plans that include such abortions, a policy of held in all health plans covered by the hyde amendment, the children's health insurance program, which senator hatch help get started, and now the house passed affordable health care for americans that. we believe legislation that violates this moral principle is not true health care reform and must be amended to reflect it. if that fails, the current legislation should be opposed. this is the catholic bishops that generally favor health-care reform. they are saying this fails on this accounts and must not be in this legislation and cannot be considered as part of health care reform.

>> where we go from here? where are going to have a cloture vote at 8:00 tonight on the motion to proceed. what would be your advice on that? >> thank you, senator hatch. let me tell you how proud i am to stand here with these two champions of this issue. you have a remarkable history of every time you had an opportunity, standing strong on an issue that i must admit is not the most popular issue in washington d.c. to promote, and i admire your courage. you ask the relevant question of the day. the stupak protections, the compromise that was reached in the house, is not in this bill. since it is not in this underlying bill, is very

unlikely to be in the final bill. i wish somebody could disprove this, but very simply, there are not enough pro-life senators to break the provision and get the stupak amendment passed on the floor if we propose it as an amendment. it is not enough. that is why have been making the case over the last 48 hours that the motion to proceed is the kibo on abortion and health care -- is the key vote on abortion in health care debate. the most important pro-life vote that a pro-life central cast, i believe in the entire time they are here is on this motion to proceed. i have seen all the arguments from many saying this is a procedural vote, nothing to worry about.

it begins the day. might potentially both this bill down, do some amendments, do some tweaking here. the facts suggest otherwise. the congressional research service has looked into this. between the 106 and a 110th congress, there were 41 cases, according to the congressional research service in which the senate approved a motion to proceed and then proceeded to a vote on the final bill. do you know what the end result of those 41 cases were when the motion to proceed was approved? 40 times out of 41, about 97%, went on to receive final approval. in other words, all but one passed into law. this suggests in to me that this

vote tonight at 8:00 on the life issue is very well determinative. some of my colleagues also argue that if we do not like the bill, then we should not be blocking the opportunity to amend it. therefore, they say let's proceed. but i do not believe, it you are truly pro-life, as the united states senator, you can make that argument, and here is why. everybody here in the senate knows what it will take to amend the reid bill. on something like this, it will take 60 votes. it is the way the senate operates. 60 votes. again, i would just like to say i wish i could count 60 pro-life senators. i wish i could, but by anybody's count, mine included, there are not 60 here.

i just believe if you are pro- life, every opportunity you get to stand for the life issue, you must stand for that issue. these really are our most vulnerable citizens. i just feel very strongly that at 8:00, when we are gaveled to a vote, we need to stand up on this life issue, or by a 97% chance, it is lost. i would just conclude my thoughts on this by saying this. there are many strong, courageous pro-life democrats in the house. that was remarkable. can you imagine the pressure they were put under? this afternoon, this evening, we just need one, not many. just one democrat who will come here and say i am pro-life, and

if we do not stand together tonight, this bill will radically expand abortion, and i cannot live with that. thank you. >> let me just thank you for your remarks come both of you. before coming here you were secretary of agriculture. you were one of the best governors in the country in the state of nebraska. miami measure, you are very sincere, dedicated, and principled person. -- by any measure. i appreciate standing here on the floor with you tonight to chat about this. senator brownback, without question, you are a leader in this body and trying to protect rights of the unborn. it is one of the things i most love about you, and there are many things that all of us holds

in high regard and a steam. your principal, dignified about it, but you do not mince any words when it comes to standing up on these very important issues. all we are saying is, let's protect the hyde language. what is wrong with protecting that language? all we want to do is not have the taxpayers pay for abortions. the vast majority of people in this country feel that way, too. secondly, why should people of conscience, who really, sincerely believe that abortions are wrong, before star to participate in abortions in any way, shape, or form?

unfortunately, this bill could lead to that force participation. i just cannot understand what is so difficult about it, when the house of representatives passed it with a huge number of people who hate the issue and want abortion rights. they passed it. what is a problematic about our body doing the same? abortions can still occur, but they are going to have to pay for them themselves rather than come to the taxpayers to pay for them. if you or a nurse or doctor or health care protection are are catholic hospital, if we have the stupak-pits language, you cannot be forced to participate in abortions. these are highly religious people with highly religious motivations, people who really have made this country the

greatest country in the world. if we do not change this language in this bill, there is going to be federal funding of abortion and there will be people who will be embarrassed and pushed towards participation in abortion. they should not have to do that. that is what we are talking about here, and it is extremely important. >> senator hatch, it is my pleasure to be able to join you on this effort. i admire your work over many years in many different capacities. this is a serious a pro-life vote as i have been around. you are probably looking, if this gets in here and it's passed, the federal government funding somewhere north of 300,000 abortions a year. 1974-1976 time frame, with the growth in the u.s. population,

you're probably looking at north of that number of federal taxpayer dollars funding of annual abortions. and i can't imagine many people at all in this country satisfied whatsoever about that kind of number taking place. i just -- i can't -- can't imagine that. but that's the -- that's been our past experience when the government funds abortion. that's -- those are the numbers what we're talking about. and i would just note, too, that the country has a long-standing ethic and moral code, the united states does. it -- we are a moral people and we have been from the outset. and some people say this or that, but a big part of that is -- has been that basic just moral code, that basic thought within the judeo-christian ethic that's been there that respects life. and this one -- it traces back to when moses even talks to the people about going into the

promised land. and he's giving the last lecture to the jewish people before going to the promised land. and in that last lecture, moses doesn't get it go in himself but he's giving a lecture, he's pulled all the people together, they've marched for 40 years in the wilderness, he pulls all of them in together. he knows he's not going in but they are and he gives a lecture. and in it -- and this is in duty ron my 30, he says something that's applicable today. he says, "this day i call heaven and earth as witnesses against you that i have set before you life and death, blessing and curses. now choose life so that you and your children may live." this is in the fundamental ethic and the background. and that's what we've got to choose today. do we choose life or do we choose death? and you choose life so that you and your children might live. and as senator johanns notes, we just need one, one vote on the other side that changes on this

and this language gets pulled out and stupak gets put in. one vote. because if they can't get the 60 and you've got to get to 60 and that one person says, i'm not going to do it unless you put stupak in this, it changes. one. to choose life. and it changes. it's a pleasure to join with both of you on this. mr. hatch: well,//ñmño> now, highlights from the senate health care debate earlier today. >> the center from michigan. motion, to proceed to an@@@@)'"

this is something that has been debated for a hundred years, and now we have the opportunity with the house having passed their version to move forward to this debate, were we will have lots of opportunities to offer amendments to debate honest differences in policy, but in the end, i believe confidently that we will come together to move forward to pass legislation that will save lives, that will save money for the american people, that will protect medicare and, and it will stop insurance abuses happening for families every single day. at this moment, i have come to the for so many times to talk about health insurance reform, as has a distinguished presiding officer from rhode island.

i want to take just a moment to say thank-you to a few people, because as you know, we would not have this opportunity literally today if it were not for senator harry reid, our distinguished majority leader. he is a quiet, smart, determined, focused leader who has listen to everyone, who has looked at the work product from the finance committee and health committee, and brought together a combined bill that is the best of both. he is going to give us the opportunity to continue to debate and approve it on the floor before final passage. i want to thank senator reid. i know he is passionate about his state of nevada, and that is his number one love after family. i think #2 is the united states senate and the ability to lead and get things done, and i want to thank him. i want to thank senator baucus

for his incredible leadership in the finance committee, senator dodd for his leadership and stewardship in bringing in the health committee through with their legislation, senator harkin, senator biden and senator bennett. i want to say that there have been two years of working on health care that i appreciate, and their efforts together to work on health care. i want to thank centers no -- senator snowe. her courageous vote in the finance committee is something we desperately appreciate. she will continue to provide input, and i am hopeful she will be with us on the final vote, because your input and her knowledge have been extremely important in this process. i also want to thank the memory of a very important center named ted kennedy, who i know is here

in spirit, mr. president. 40 years of dedication to this cause. finally, i want to thank president obama for his vision. we would not be here today, eight years under a former president, we did not have the opportunity to get here to this place. we did not have the opportunity to be able to end insurance abuses and truly protect medicare for the future. to put forward health care reform to save lives and save money. i want to thank president obama also for understanding that healthcare is also about jobs, and that we have too many people in this country today who are losing their jobs and losing their health insurance. it is impossible to talk about health care reform without also talking about jobs, because for most families, they are connected and one and the same. i have spoken on the floor so

many times on health care costs and access, and frankly, health care is something that brought me to public service 30 years ago, when i was 5, i just want that for the record. i have been fighting to get to this debate, to get to this point, in terms of affordable health insurance for all americans. tonight after this vote, we start the real debate. this bill provides a framework for every american to find affordable insurance. is it everything i would do if i was writing it by myself? of course not. every member can say the same thing. , but the democratic process is coming together with the best ideas and negotiating and doing the best weekend to be able to

solve as much as we can in the best way possible. i will continue to work to make health-care truly affordable and sponsor and co-sponsor amendments as we move forward to improve on what i believe is a very, very good bill. i am confident at the end, mr. president, that we will pass legislation that saves lives, that saves money, that protect medicare, and stops insurance abuses. mr. president, i set up a health care people's lobby will refer started this effort on my website. so that people could share their stories, how they felt about what we should be doing. what should happen, what are their experiences with their health insurance and the companies that cover them now. i have heard so many stories, and i want to thank everyone,

thousands of people who have shared their stories. i want to put a face on this debate and vote tonight by sharing just a couple with you. when we say saving lives, this is not just a slogan, mr. president. we are talking about saving lives. 45,000 people have the ultimate rationing every year, because they cannot find affordable insurance. as a consequence, they lose their life. 45,000 people, and the greatest country in the world. we can do better than that, and that is what this bill is about. i want to share just one story of a young man, joe, from michigan. he is a recent graduate of dental school. he worked very hard and is very bright. he was just between jobs after completing his residency, and we know how long and hard that is to