values for the medical dollars we are spending and how access to preventative care could actually change health profiles for millions of americans. those kinds of opportunities that are here -- >> >> thank you very much, [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> there is no question that this website has to get fixed and no way to express the frustration. i want to address the affordable insurance that is out there and the response that the public has had wanting to get on the website, get information because they need heat -- need health care and health insurance. because of the time i want to move quickly, ask you a few questions, if you can do yes or

no, that would be great. let me share with you a story from michigan that was highlighted in an article in the l.a. times that talked about a woman named judith, 48 years old, work in a department store, had an insurance plan that costs are $65 per month that was a -- was affordable, she thought she had insurance, but then she was diagnosed with cancer and found out that her plan had a $2000 annual limit for treatment, so she delayed her care and it got worse, she was in a difficult situation. madame secretary, after january 1, will judith or any other woman face a cap on their coverage for breast cancer treatment? >> no. >> will judith or any other woman be charged more or be denied insurance just for being a woman? >> no.

>> after january 1 will -- judith or any other woman have to fear being denied coverage by her insurance company because of breast cancer? >> no, she will not. >> these are all good things. some people in michigan certainly think so. i received a letter from greg miller, who said that his wife and he had a policy that covered their son and they received a notice this week that their son policy was being canceled because it was not compliant with the aca. it had a high deductible and paid only one doctor's visit per year and had no preventative care with limited prescription drug coverage. in fairness, the insurer advised us to go to the health care exchange to obtain a policy. we had no problem accessing the exchange or navigating to the various policy alternatives with much greater coverage than the old policy.

we certainly want to hear more of that. thank you for passing obamacare. after january 1, will his sons insurance policy he guaranteed to cover prescription drugs? >> yes. >> after january first, with his insurance cover important preventative screenings without out-of-pocket costs for the family? like yes. >> yesterday i heard from crystal, a small business owner in pontiac, michigan, who has not been able to afford insurance for three years. she admitted that before the affordable care act she was one of the people who was using the emergency room and adding to the cost of everyone else and their insurance. last month she went to healthcare.gov and was able to ensure herself quickly without interruption. she got a plan for $163 per month. she said to me that it is a payment she can live with and

she could not tell me how happy she was to finally have health insurance, especially at her age. madam secretary, we have heard concerns about small businesses for years that have struggled for insurance. i certainly at every meeting for years and years at every performance meeting have wanted to talk about this. can you discuss how pulling together small business owners like crystal in the market ways will help them continue to afford insurance? >> small business owners, under the law, employers with less than full-time employment have no obligation to provide coverage, but many of them want to, it is how they keep, recruit, and retain the best employees. they are often in a market where they pay higher rates and have exorbitant costs if one of their employees gets sick or has a diagnosis. so, having an option, and small

business owners can shop inside or outside the marketplace, but there will be new options within the marketplace with plans specifically for them and for the employers with fewer than 25 employees and low income workers, they may actually qualify for a new tax credit to provide that coverage up to 50% of the cost of insurance so that they are -- there are not only more choices and features but a larger pool, but for some a significant tax incentive for employer coverage. >> thank you, senator. senator grassley? >> thank you for joining us, madam secretary. you know of my interest in the claims act that brought 30 to $40 billion back, it is one of the best tools against fraud. i start by referring to a letter that you sent to congress on october 30. the letter states that the department does not consider qualified health benefits or

other programs related to the oral facility marketplaces and other programs under obamacare to be federal health care programs. if that interpretation stands, it would have serious consequences. your letter calls into question whether vital enforcement and oversight tools and rebates, kick ax and bribes would be available to your agency. it weakens the ability to use the claims act. i do not understand why you are giving insurers within the exchanges a blanket exemption from years of civil and criminal laws and regulations, including anti-kickback law violations, just to name a few. this is not about my position on the underlying law, madam secretary. you and i disagree on that, however we can both agree, i hope, that you are moving forward with implementation no

matter how badly it goes and how many promises are broken along the way. right now it is not going well. trying to exempt obamacare from a host of criminal and civil laws designed to protect taxpayer dollars from fraud just adds insult to injury. these laws were put in place to stop aggressive practices that ripped off taxpayers. you should not just be able to exempt obamacare from these protections with a stroke of the pen. a few questions -- was this exemption requested by any providers? if so? who provided it? >> no, sir, not to my knowledge, this was a legal discussion in the department. because these are private plans, they are not government plans. the legal interpretation was that the insurance plans being offered in the marketplace and offering plans off the marketplace should be treated the same. these are not government insurance programs, these are private plans.

>> if you have any discussion with any providers or offer than these plans prior to their decision to join? >> no, sir. >> finally, would you make the lawyers who reviewed this decision available to my staff so that we can ask follow-up questions to better understand why the decision was made to greatly weaken the available statutes to protect taxpayer dollars? wax i would be glad to do that. again, we have not given up any authority over fraud. our department continues to have careful monitoring. we can decertify grounds for being in the marketplace, we can work with the attorney general. the state insurance departments from around the country are the regulators of these private insurance plans and private companies, who have very aggressive anti-fraud efforts. it was just a legal determination, since these are

private companies and not dollars coming out of the medicare trust fund, that they should not be declared to be government health plans. >> the medicare advantage plan is the same and is governed. >> actually, it is not quite the same, senator. it is a private insurance plan where federal dollars are paid directly out of the trust fund to the medicare trust fund. this is different, these are individuals playing premiums -- paying premiums to the private marketplace. >> may i reserve my time for a second round? >> you may, absolutely. >> thank you, mr. chairman. secretary sibelius, i have read the testimony and listen to it carefully and appreciated your commitment to making the website work. i am concerned, though, that a lot of the testimony and discussion we are having seems

to imply that the problem we are dealing with has to deal with outlets on the website. experts are being hired to get the website fixed and then everything will be great. the chairman asked you if it would not be better to hold off until we can get the website fixed. i want to expand the little beyond that. i am concerned, frankly, not that you will fix the website, but if the law will be fixed. i see that we are now finding that the concerns that many of us raise before about the law being properly laid out in real, our concerns about that are coming true. the president said -- if you like your plan, you can keep it. and not because the website is not working, but because of the way the law was put together we see that for millions of americans today, they are getting canceled. 100,000 in idaho, way more in terms of percentages than what

the president is talking about. the president promised that if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. millions of americans are finding out they cannot keep their doctor. the president promised that we could cut the average family premium by $2500 per year. although i read your testimony where you talked about premiums, i do not know what data sets you are using. the data i am aware of shows premiums in the individual market skyrocketing. they are going up faster than they did before the law. a quarter of a million dollars, you will not see your taxes increase the single dime. not one single dime. yet, as we discussed then,

somewhere between $800 billion in a trillion dollars of new taxes that were delayed in the implementation that are now starting to hit and squarely hit the middle class. my question to you is, isn't it time for a timeout? the law is not working as it was promised. website is not working. let's fix it. the law is not working. isn't it time for a timeout so we can go when they start premiums go up and not down. seeing the failure of the law to occur. respectfully disagree about theassessment law working. there are millions of americans who have actually received

benefits under the law. adults who million have insurance now because they are covered on the parents plan. there are seniors who are experiencing not only additional benefits in their medicare plan, but despite all of the accusations that somehow medicare advantage would cease to exist, we have a stronger and less expensive program today than we did. seniors80% discount for in their prescription drugs if they fell into the doughnut hole. millions of americans who have private employer coverage now have no co-pays and no fromurance, everything cancer screenings to immunizations. we have the lowest health-care cost increases in decades. in the private insurance market.

in medicare, and medicaid. -- noare at an all-time one >> you can go through those points, and those datasets you're talking about. some of those have occurred. on the flip side we are seeing millions of americans lose their health care. millions more seeing their premiums going up, and the price for some of these fixes that you're talking about is phenomenally higher. it time to go away and take a look at the areas of the law that simply are failing? marketplace,n the the rates have come in about 60% ther than what congressional budget office projected those rates to be. >> the projection after -- not lower than actual fact. >> those were the projections of the rates, much like we heard

senator wyden talk about the projections around medicare and -- make our -- medicare part d. >> the rates are going down? >> i did not say they were going down. i said they are lower than was predicted. millions of people in the market, they will actually for the first time ever have some financial help paying for their health insurance. >> we are going to have to move on here. >> one of the toughest public service jobs i ever had was the elected insurance commission of florida. one of the most doubling insurance markets was the individual insurance policies. peopleuld happen is would be enticed to come in to cheap health insurance and then

over time, as the group got sicker, there was no control on the rates. it would go up, and they found limited health insurance. that is what the affordable care act is trying to address. we are talking about the individual insurance policies. not the group policies. case, we nowcular have no lifetime limits. we do not have pre-existing conditions. looking in your states and find many examples where the so-called cancellation fact, theyd, but in are going into a policy that is going to give them protections because of the 10 things that are required.

in the affordable care act individual health insurance policies. colleagues ask my they look at this, please consider for example, a lady in that wasad a policy $54 a month. that sounds great. that is being canceled. when you got into the internals, as reported by cbs, lo and behold, she didn't have much coverage at all, and had she gotten a disease like cancer, she would have virtually had no coverage. she's going to have that coverage under the policies and the individual markets that are covered under the aca. thing abouty one what is going on in the states. take a state like kentucky.

they did their work. in the first month, they sign up 30,000 people. look at my state. states basically because of politics they decided not to do anything about it. up, notept money to set going to expand medicaid, and look at the difficulty that now the federal government has had in 27 up this exchange states. why couldn't we have been like kentucky why couldn't we be like kentucky and be way ahead of the game? excuse forere is no the website not working.

madam secretary, i am one of the ones that said, as i heard mr. chairman say, that people have listed your words when you criticized the fact the website was not working, and i said it was inexcusable. what legal authority do you all have to guarantee the contractors responsible for this not working will be held into account? we have significant contracts with a number of key outside industries. see ti and to ssi are two of them. we have paid out a portion of the money that has been encumbered for the website

built. on a not up and running sufficient level at this point and we have new management with one of our key contractors driving part of the fix. sure the funding delivers on the product promise. it is not there yet and that is the promised commitment. we are working to make sure as bills come in, they are clearly reviewed and that we have the opportunity to make sure the havect we need and committed to is delivered. >> mr. chairman, i will make a final statement. as someone who has fought and bled for this and sincerely thinks it will work in the long

run, i want to hold them account and burn their fingers and make for not being responsible in producing a product all of us could be proud. thank you, mr. chairman. >> madam secretary, i want to mock -- to remind everyone again how we got here today. committeeers of this -- details we only received assurances things would go smoothly. we started hearing from people directly involved in implementation of the exchanges were deeply worried about the website's launch. in june, the government accountability office issued a report it should have served as a warning to you as a --hlighted information is implementation -- it was never addressed. by july, it was clear to me your

department was being less than transparent about whether the exchanges would be ready by october 1. i introduced the exchange sunset at the 2013. my bill would have sunset the exchanges and the individual mandate for people unable to enroll starting october 1 as promised. august, we determined tasks remain to be completed in a short time. your main website contractor one behind onere falling their highest priority items. thatne included and -- services were intermittently not available. several days later, the white hub isnnounced the data ready for operation. in mid-september, ems ordered a contractor to make a significant

change to the system to require people to submit personal information before revealing any plans or associated costs. days before the launch, testing showed a few hundred visitors crashed the site. the next day, a decision was made to move forward to watch it knowing there would be a high security risk during testing. i believe you were given advice, counsel, and warning, from experts inside your agency and out, that the health care exchanges were not going to be ready. i believe to protect the you put us in, jeopardy. millions of americans are scared and they do not know whether they will have coverage in a matter of weeks and do not know whether coverage will include.

letters now getting from insurance companies they do not understand. more people are losing their insurance than are signing up on the web that. they are being directed to a website that does not work. about lifeften talk and death in the context it deserves. at this time, it is real and it may -- means the difference between life and death for many americans at a loss for what to do. we know fixing the website will never fix the uncertainty and ramifications that result from this law. i have to wonder, if you have failed tos that you heed the warnings and ignored the calls for members of congress and proceeded to open the exchanges october 1, immediately followed by a promotional tool to tell everyone, it is a great problem to have.

kansans do not think these are great problem to have. hometown, stephen wrote, i am completely disgusted. i have spent the last two days trying to get my application through. this could not be a critical issue except the insurance coverage i currently have is going away because of the new federal requirements. you yourself know this law has serious problems. you delayed half the deadlines notemployers and unions are for millions of other americans .osing their health care their worry and fear are palpable. your main goal should have been to protect americans to assure their safety. in your zeal to implement this law, not warnings, not advice, not counsel would deter you from implementing the exchanges there you said america should hold you accountable. that is why today, i repeat my

request for you to resign. >> thank you, senator. >> madame secretary, thank you for joining us this morning. the problems we are facing with the marketplace website are unacceptable, they need to be fixed immediately. i would like to put things in a historical perspective. the age-old plan is facing hurdles. problems the set show soul security. medicare is facing trouble. new problems in medicare bug trend it -- drug benefit. those are headlines from the early part of this decade. major programs that have come below in terms of the social safety net in this country and health care security. while this is an excusable, it is a challenge that has been faced time and time when any program has been unveiled. i find it amazing that those that seek to ascribe blame have spent every waking hour of the last four years working to dismantle, destroy, obstruct, and impede the success of the affordable care act.

they are concerned not about its failure, but about its success. what i hope we will focus on is how to succeed. i want to get a sense when those of us on the committee worked to put this together, we were under the assumption that state- controlled by republican legislatures or governors would put a higher premium on the love of state rights than their dislike of the president or some ideological political opposition. which is why we are seeing far better success in states that have established their own marketplace. what is the consequence of having so many of the states not pursue their own marketplace and delegating it to the federal government? did you envision not having that many states? what has been the consequences of the burden of that?

>> we really didn't know. we knew that 27 states had sued around the constitutionality of the bill. there was uncertainty what would happen when the court declared it unconstitutional how those states would react.

some have chosen a partnership where we still run the bulk of the exchange. it has added to the uncertainty of how large the operation would be. we did have deadlines in january of 13 for states to officially declare if they would run their own marketplace or not. and by february, a partnership plan. the state using the hub is significantly higher than they might have predicted initially at the outset of the plan. we have robust product offerings, very competitive. one fourth of the insurers are brand-new. they have choices, they have competition. >> the state marketplaces seem to be having greater success than those being run federally? >> the web features are running more smoothly if you think about one set of products and one set of prices in one state. it is a less complicated -- but all of the states, as well as the federal markets are using the hub. they are coming into the federal market to certify security and income -- >> let me ask you one last question because we are hearing from a number of providers, including health centers. my state did not set up its own exchange. insurance companies have yet to provide them with networking contracts. in order to ensure network adequacy.

if we are going to say state insurance regulators are responsible, many of these are actively hostile. how are people supposed to shop for a plan when the network is not yet in place? >> there is no plan that has a network that is readily available and made the scrutiny of the state insurance department. every plan in the market has a network. consumers can access that information as we shop for insurance coverage. >> we know president obama's promise that if you like the health plan you have, you will be able to keep your health plan. millions of americans are finding out that just isn't the case.

henry ford said that customers could have his model t in any color they want so long as it was black. if you like your current plan, you can keep it as long as it is the model he chooses. i offered a proposal to give people the honest choice to keep their plans but everyone in the majority party voted against it. it still has the promise on their that if you like your health plan, you can keep it. 2600 wyomingites got word that

they could not keep the insurance that they've got even if they like it. i am working with the bill under ron johnson that would allow americans to keep their health care if they like it. these notices are a up to the american public. it is hurting the economy and making health insurance less affordable. the one-size-fits-all approach is hurting our country and we need more people in congress that understand this. my hope is that even my democrat colleagues are seeing the light. my question to you is this. what is the administration doing

to help the people as a result of the broken promise? they can't qualify for subsidy and are facing thousands of dollars in insurance costs. wyoming's costs are higher than any other state in the nation and we only have two providers. there has not been an increase in the number of providers. your answer? >> i believe the president's promise was in the law from the day that it was written. a grandfather clause that we wrote as a prophecy -- policy. the plans in effect that did not change to the detriment of the consumer, even though the insurance company could raise premiums, they could not eliminate benefits or take away items that the consumer alike.

those are in effect -- consumer liked. those are in effect and will be enjoyed into the future. they don't have to come into compliance with anything in the law. but if the plans turnover and this is -- you heard senator nelson and we served together as insurance commissioners. talking about the planned turnover. if plans changed over and over again since 2010, insurers have been on notice since 2010 that they needed to come into compliance. the employer market and every other part of health insurance. >> i am not worried about the insurers, i am worried about the people. they are worried -- losing the

doctor that they like to go to. there are changes that have been made that are causing some problems. you also mentioned a number of people are signing up. i noticed in washington state, 35,000 people signed up for obama care. 87% will receive their coverage through medicaid. tony 6000 people enrolled in kentucky and 80% of those will be in medicaid. 96% are going into medicaid. it has costs to the federal government, particularly with some of the increases that were put into this law. are we going to be able to afford this increase? and the other customers paying the tab to provide the revenue to do this?

>> when the affordable care act was passed, it was anticipated 100% of the states would expand medicaid. it was altered by the supreme court decision that made medicaid expansion a voluntary expansion for states.

we have 30 governors republican and democratic who have declared their interest in moving ahead with medicaid expansion. that expansion of 100% of the states was paid for in the affordable care act. it is heart of the law that was passed in 2010. unlike medicare part d that was not paid for when congress passed it. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i am convinced that the fundamentals are sound. we have seen the implementation in a very orderly way, protecting millions of americans. the practices that existed before the affordable care act are being dealt with. as my colleagues talk about the actions of private insurance companies today, go back and see how many people lost coverage. insurance companies pulling out of markets, reducing benefits and increasing premiums. i also point out in regard to

the exchanges, the number of carriers offering plans and the pricing of those plans came in much stronger than we anticipated. it is sound. our disappointment as to how the website shopping and enrollment was not done more effectively starting october 1. i guess my question, madam secretary. as a result of the delay in individuals being able to shop and enroll, there are people that will be disadvantaged. people who have not gotten as far as they want. consumer fatigue. people will have a more challenging time. we also have a large number of people that have lost coverage, which was understandable because these are policies that were changed since 2010.

these are individuals that changed their insurance policies frequently. they want to enroll by mid- december so that they can get coverage effective january 1. what steps are you taking to deal with -- to make it easier and more convenient for people to be able to shop and enroll? what steps have you taken for those suffering the delay to get the website working. >> step one through six is getting be site fixed as rapidly as possible. we are deploying additional

assets to the call center. operations have additional individuals now. we have 12,000 trained call center representatives that not only have in english and spanish version of scripts, but translators that can answer questions and up to 150 languages. they can take them from start to finish or help create an application. we are trying to train throughout the ground and they are actively working in their neighborhoods. the state has a contract through community groups and well-known medical advocacy groups. walking people through a paper application or on the phone or in person. >> i would urge you to make that available to those of us more comfortable using applications. >> we had alternate strategies to enhance those alternate strategies.

>> the state exchanges operated by the states are having different results. some are doing well and some are not. i would urge you to monitor the progress made on the state exchanges because we want to make sure those that have been disadvantaged because of the inadequacy of the performance of online shopping and enrollment that it might go beyond federal exchanges and those are also protected as you look at ways to compensate for the slower rollout.

>> we have regular updates with the state directors. it won is occurring at 4:00 this afternoon. we are not only trying to pay attention to the federal marketplace, but keeping him very close touch with lessons learned. the applying them in other areas to figure out what is working and what is not. using the full six months to really reach out and enroll people that are eager for affordable health care. >> madame secretary, in september of 2009, the polls said that 88% of americans were satisfied with their current health insurance plan. which is why the president made a promise that he made. as you can see, yesterday afternoon, the white house website says if you like your

plan, you can keep it. you don't have to change a thing due to the health care law. we know that lying to congress is a crime. lying to the american people is not. i would like to ask you a simple true or false question. is that statement true? or is it false? >> i think the statement -- the vast majority of americans that are insured are in the employer market or public plans are veterans plans. those plans have stayed in place and have continued to offer benefits. the 11 million people in the individual market will keep plans that now will have stronger coverage. others will have to choose if they have a brand-new plan.

>> let the record note that you have refused to answer my question if it is true or false. in june of 2010, is it true that the department that you headed estimated between 40 and 67% of those buying insurance would lose grandfather status? is it true that on the same day that your department estimated that 66% of the people in small employer plans and 45% would lose their grandfather status by 2013? >> senator, that is an inaccurate use of those statistics. could i answer the question? i can tell you what the statistics mean. i would like to tell you what

the statistics mean. >> she did answer, she said it was inaccurate. >> that is not what the statistics say. it was a look back at how much turn there was in the marketplace, not a projection of what was going to happen. >> isn't it true, according to the congressional budget office that 156 million americans get their health insurance from their employer sponsored health care plan in 2013? the office estimated that because of the failure to keep the promise on the white house website, 78 million americans will not be able to keep their lands as promised.

>> i don't have any idea what that statistic is. there are about 170 million that have employer-based coverage but i don't know the statistic. >> i would commend the estimate to you which is what congress depends upon. 78 million people will not be able to keep their employer- provided coverage. this is a false statement that this administration has consistently doubled down on and repeated time and time again. the only thing i can conclude is that it is impossible to do something in this administration that gets you fired. you can lie to the american people, consistently misrepresent the facts. it is impossible to get fired. so i will ask you about the

navigators. the president is in dallas texas today touting the navigator program, which, as you know, are people who are hired to help people navigate the affordable care act. i would like to ask you this question, if you answer it. isn't it true there is no navigators tor undergo a criminal background check, even though they will sensitive personal information from the individuals they help sign up for the formal care at? >> that is true. part of the federal requirement. a a convicted felon could be navigator and acquirable -- acquire sensitive information on the notes to them? >> that is possible. they have taken the responsibility to screen individual navigators and make

sure they are sufficiently trained for the job. it is possible. >> thank you very much. >> nice to see you. letterto start with a from a small business owner in hudson, one of the most conservative suburbs in our state. he said, i am a smaller -- father and small business owner and began my business in 2009. would sell me health insurance. i did not -- i could not get insurance at any price due to pre-existing conditions. now, my family is incurable. i get letters like this all the time. we all do. of people in all kinds of walks in life.

senator menendez spoke of the difficulty of implementing a huge sold -- security program. back to your junior whennior in high school your father, member of congress, that fateful year, voted for medicare. i suppose he shared stories with you about the opposition. in those days, the leading republican politicians like congressman dole and rumsfeld and gerald ford voted against it. companies and the ama imposed medicare. the rolling out of it was so controversial, especially because medicare resulted in integrating southern hospitals and if you think this is controversial, what is happening now, imagine the difficulty a year after civil rights around the time of voting rights

passing, that medicare forced hospitals to integrate. the whole view this is so controversial and so unprecedented when you roll out a new program, the important thing, i think, five years later people look back on medicare and thought, what was the big dear -- big deal and why were people so opposed? five years from now, or 48 years after medicare, what are people going to say about the affordable care act in five or 48 years? >> i am hopeful this will be another significant step forward in ensuring all americans have access to affordable health coverage, which is not what we can claim today. the only western country which does not have health care as a basic right. this is a significant feature for not only uninsured

americans, and they will have access, for the first time, either to medicaid expansion or to affordable plans in the marketplace. also, those individuals who have been referred to a number of market, the individual the last marketplace where they do not enjoy the consumer protections every other person who has health care in their workplace and joys no pre- existing condition limitations. no medical underwriting. virtually 100% of people are medically underwritten. few are healthy, that is great. if not, you are in terrible trouble. these folks want health insurance. they want health insurance. i think this is a significant step forward, and when we will look back on, hopefully, and applaud the day we finally made significant step.

republican and democratic presidents have been attempting to accomplish this. clearly, the opposition is still quite ferocious and i am hoping people understand what their options and benefits could be and what their opportunities are. >> thank you for that. the sender and i were just talking earlier. medicarepposed the drug expansion. i cannot speak for the reason he did. i did because it was too much of a giveaway and did not provide the level i thought it should for prescription drug benefit. it could have been done in a better way. i did -- we did something i know a number of people on our side of the aisle did. we helped -- we held town hall meetings and sent my staff out to help people, how can i sign up for prescription drug benefit. we helped constituents navigate a labyrinth and arduous path of how you get prescription drug

benefits. my republican friends. it is the law. after this, i hope -- this disastrous rollout, i hope after ins my colleagues will work their states to help us work for the american people. i was hand -- handed a note from my staff. republican house members in ohio have gone so far as to tell constituents who have questions to call brown's office, because he voted for it and we did not. publicas a nation and officials, we do our jobs. we took an oath. i just hope we pull together and make the law worked as well as it can. >> thank you. the law, but a lobby administration has chosen to delay portions of. i think that has been done very

discriminately. i think we all agree the rollout has been a failure of epic proportion's. there were a couple of front- page stories in politico today in which there was a tech expert quoted as saying, this might just be an error, but you cannot pass an undergraduate computer science class by making these mistakes. we have all talked a lot about it and we hope to get that right. i think eventually, that part will be gotten right. i believe this is fundamentally flawed legislation. seeing is higher rates and fewer jobs. when you pass something that has rating,axes, community all kinds of mandated coverages, i think it is inevitable you will see rates go up. the point is this was built upon a faulty foundation predicated upon a

bunch of promises made to the american people, which are being broken. i want to come back too, because i think it is so fundamental to you debate, on june 14 2010 -- the role you said would make it on the president posses promise that americans can keep their health plan and dr. they like under the new law. did you read the regulation when you released it. >> yes, i did. >> if you read it, how could you possibly say this regulation will keep the president posses federalwent on register, your agency estimates up to 69% of employer provided plans and individual market plants, will lose their grandfathered status by 2014? >> i tried to explain to the sender that those estimates were made by the health economists who look back. that was a snapshot that had occurred in the individual

market year in and year out. few people stay for more than a year. we were doing that as a backward look. on notice to insurance companies, you can basically any coming into compliance with the law by keeping the plans in place. that is basically what the grandfather clause said. fromt enormous pushback medical disease groups, advocacy , >> doesn'tth care it knowingly violate? -- the president and your promise that if you like your health care plan, you can keep it? there was not any caveat on that at the time. it was not like there were footnotes. it did not say, if you like your health care plan, you can keep canceled, or gets unless it gets changed, or

unless we do not like it. it said, if you like your health care plan, you can keep it. the president said it over and over again. how can you go out knowing what you know and allow the president to continue to say that, and you and other administration members to say that? >> that is what the grandfather clause was all about in the first place. have i say, it was very controversial. we felt it was important. also, in the grandfather clause, with the samein caveat. i can tell you for the vast majority of people who get employer-based health care, are in a public plan or the v in the a plan, or medicare, and part of the insurance market, their plans are very much in place. in thes change coming

individual marketplace, with consumer protections many people never enjoyed or experienced. not have the plan they had in 2013. >> youth and people -- americans in the market should be able to keep plant they like even if the government does not approve of them? >> if the plan was in place from the time the law was passed, that is what the grandfather clause said. >> i think most americans believe in grace. most americans are pretty forgiving people and so, they will tolerate and accept honest mistakes. to me, this is a dishonest mistake. thehave been misleading american people and the president has, over and over. i would much rather you just come up and say, we were wrong and we did not tell the truth. the pinocchio thing. you have four a yields on the statement. it strikes me people would be expected of it. take it off the white house website. it is not a true statement and never was. it is one of those things that when people were sold this, it

was based upon. it is a tragedy the american people bought into this and that you all knew full well it would not be the case. >> thank you very much. >> thank you. thank you for being here today. we appreciate your testimony. you testified in your opening statement that q ssi had been hired to do the coronation of the web and the hub? >> they have taken on a new role in the last couple of weeks of organizing the fixes going in. >> are you aware in june of this year, the inspector general issued a report, finding q ssi violating cms requirements on security that exposed 6 million medicare beneficiaries to private information? >> i can't -- i am

aware. theyderstanding is basically inherited a contract from another contractor and did initially, various provisions in place. in themediately fix it transition and did self report that to us. >> they have a cost contract to do it they're doing echo is there a contract for them to correct that? >> it was corrected immediately. there is a provision to make sure they comply with all of the requirements. >> the whole subject of navigators, it will be the vein of my question. on the 20th of june asking, if for the requirements you are putting in to protect secure information, have not received an answer yet, understand you have been very busy, and i respect that. i will use my time to answer a couple of death assay couple of questions. what are you doing to ensure they protect private information they are supposed to of american

mustens? >> the navigators go through a minimum of 20 hours training. a significant portion focuses on privacy and security issues. know, there is no personal health information never collected or needed. they do not have access to that, unlike and gas unlike an --urance agent today >> excuse me for interrupting. i want to be sure i get to -- under the irs code, there are a number of provisions for personal information being used. to estimate the subsidy someone will get, you would have to know their income. will the navigators be able to use the information to make the estimate? >> if the consumer chooses to share the information, they could give the consumer information about what they qualify for. >> i want to get to this point. the law prohibits insurance

agents from being navigators unless they quit their job. it also has a medical loss ratio that basically allows insurance agents not to sell commission. be forors were meant to the american people and the obamacare law. in the state of georgia, my state has been so concerned about the risk they have made it a requirement every navigator have a pet -- a criminal background check in reference to the question asked by somebody previously, do you think there should be a similar requirement nationwide by your require -- department to make sure no navigator gets private information without a background check? >> there are probably 45,000 agents and brokers who have been trained on the affordable care act and are very much part of the process of reaching out to individuals. we did write the requirements for the navigators that very much nearer what many states have in place for licensed

insurance agents, and then added a provision that states could indeed add additional requirements. a would you reject to requirement they have background checks? >> i think that -- if that is the will of congress, we would take a look at it. over to one shift other thing. my state is known for the capital city of atlanta and the vacation city of savannah. we are a very rural state. state, in a recent article in the new york times, the rates in rural georgia, particularly southeast georgia, are going up astronomically. is world america getting hit disproportionately hard because of the effects of the affordable care act on its premium rates? >> i was the governor of a rural state. i can tell you world america has

always paid a higher price for health care than urban america. is less often a monopoly market. i do not think that has changed enough yet with the affordable care act. i think new competition in most markets in the country will begin to change that, particularly in this exchange market where people often have no choice and no competition. >> thank you for your testimony. thank you for being here today to answer some of these critical questions. chairman, i noticed in your opening remarks, you expressed frustration about the fact administration officials are saying you said they did not see the problems coming. i share that frustration. there were plenty of warnings. one was a letter i sent you back in august.

i sent this to you and the director. i sent it because i was hearing a lot from ohio about problems with enrollment and particularly problems from ohio because they did not believe they were getting the answers they need from you. i asked a bunch of questions. the concern ohio could not think there was even a minimal amount of coordination. who in your agency is in charge. i also expressed my concern about what i knew about the i.t. concerns. comments that were pretty obvious, wondering whether those could be solved by october 1. i asked whether you had tested the technology, specifically whether systems were going to work and what the results were of the testing. i said i was concerned there

would be a lot of confusion. unfortunately, there have been. the august letter still remains unanswered. i want to ask you today, who is in charge of the federal can -- inn ohio who ohio? is --inistrator tavener he oversees the agency. >> known for ohio? >> do we have n individual? >> accountable to the state of ohio? >> not for state, no. >> you talked about how you think you should not take down this site, a suggestion by the chairman and others. you said better to do routine updates while it is happening. are you testing the site? the agrades you are using? >> on

regular basis. >> will you provide the results? regular -- i do not know what you're asking for. >> to the american people. dayesting is going on every we did with every piece of part oft that became the site. it was tested not only by the company and the contractor as it was presented, but there was a cms test performed. >> let me continue because i have a short time. a lot of stories from constituents. onuy says he tried to get

for two leaks and found that his coverage was doubled. a woman called in having tough time making ends meet. -- telephoneof call and says she still has not heard back. the stories are out there. 12 million people nationally will lose the coverage they have. we talked about a lot of promises that were made. how many ohioans had their insurance plans canceled? do we know? >> i do not know. state that provide information, will we know how many? quek again, the federal government, these are private plans. ohio companies could give you that information. haveis not information we at the department of health and human services. these are private insurance companies. >> we will not know how many people? class you could ask the ohio insurance companies. that would be a great way to get the answer.

>> insurance companies are canceling plans because the legislation you are implementing does not permit the plant because it does not meet your mandate. it would be helpful for you to know how many of the plans are being canceled. >> the customer is in a grandfather plan after -- they have not received a notice. i really do not -- >> you do not care about the data? >> i do, but you asked if i could give you the answer. i cannot tell you for ohio. >> let me ask a final question about covering the uninsured. we have talked about the promises. you keep the coverage, the cost being less rather than more. we have not talked about coverage. all of thisfter , over $1d bureaucracy trillion of consumer spending, and so on, there are still 30 million american 10 years from now after full implementation of this, that will not have health insurance? is that accurate? >> i hope it is not the case.

>> do you believe it is accurate? >> i understand. i do not know what their premise is. behink that is not likely to true, if the program can be fully realized. >> do you have a number on that? >> i do not. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you, mr. chairman. about theed as i am huge problems with the website, i am more concerned with some of the underlying fundamental with thisblems legislation that are starting to manifest themselves. i want to share with you a few short e-mails from the hundreds and probably thousands of e- mails i have received from ofnsylvanians conveying some the concern, and, in particular, how the false promises are

affecting real people, in this case, my constituents. i got an e-mail october 11 from a dad in pennsylvania and i will quote this. received notice last week my health care will more than tripled. i am currently paying 265 thousand dollars per month for me and my two young sons. on january 1 2014, the monthly premium will be $836 per month. the president promised you could keep your plan and families will save $2500 per year. i can teach my plan and i just cannot afford it. i qualify for subsidies. $80 a month. while there was a promise families would save money with this, it is clearly not the case for this family. there is another problem alluded to several times. we know famously the president and others have said, if you like your health -- health insurance, you can keep it. a woman from lancaster county sent me an e-mail.

it is short. i will quote it. she said she is a two-time breast cancer survivor. president obama said if we like our insurance, we would be able to keep it. that was obviously untrue. ". that's untrue." i got an e-mail on october 7.

said i've been self-employed for 1 years and have never been without health iven assurance. three years ago i was diagnosed with multiple scle loss sis. having a preexisting condition was not a problem for me as i had never let my insurance lafments my medication cost would be $4,000 per month without insurance. i received notice they were going to cancel my plan and i had to sign up for new coverage through the health insurance exchange. if my coverage is not in place before january 1 i will have to go without my medications. this will cause permanent disabilities, blindness and problems walking. any plan i find that would cover me channels me back to signing up through the exchange. i'm a small business owner and a productive member of society. i own my own house. now 50eu78 in trouble. we call this woman and we discuss this. it turned out there were two options available to her through the exchange. one option would allow her to continue to see the doctors that have been treating her. the other option would cover the medication, negotiate option would cover both. well it's clear to me they've been repeated many times, i think millions of times across the country. and it's a hugte problem. so i guess my question for you is i understand this administration is never going to want to repeal this bill. i get that. i understand you've delayed

whole sections of it but don't want to delay the individual mandate for instance. my question is there r there any changes you want to recommend we could make to this bill so that the promises that were made by the president, by yourself, by others for these people, promises which clearly are not being kept could actually in fact be kept? are there any that you would recommend to us? >> senator, i'd be happy to work with members of congress who want to achieve the goals of the bill which are to provide for the first time affordable health coverage for millions of people who don't have it and an additional goal of the bill i would say is to in the marketplace, the last remaining market where people have been denied coverage because about a quarter of the people who seek insurance can't get it at all, medically underwritten, denied because of preexisting condition where they have an opportunity to move forward. if there is some framework that is you have in mind, what i really want to do is get the program up and running and get information to people about how they can take advantage of -- >> the program as it's designed,

the bill as it's designed does not honor these promises. let me ask the grandfathering clause we all know has so many exceptions that many plans are simply not grandfathered. are you willing to reexamine the exceptions to the grandfathering clause so that many plans could be actually grandfathered? >> i don't think grandfathering perspectively can work very well and since companies are now in a the and you will market with an array of new are you plans. in plans. many have added consumer him many have added consumer protections in the last three and a half years. and in as you said, the regulation came out shortly after the bill was written. it provided a framework. we've been working with insurers as they look to what plans they would put in the new marketplace, what plans they would keep in place. and in and the grandfather

clause has been part of that ongoing discussion. >> we're going to have to move on. thank you very much. >> thank you mr. chairman. i know you've probably seen lots of headlines. i don't know if you've seen this one, thousands face delay in healthcare enrollment. over 100,000 workers will be able to sign up as of october 1. the reason why i'm asking you about that particular headline is because it's from the boston globe august 3, 2006. and in that case, we do know the rest of the story. the rest of the story is that the governor of massachusetts

estimated that only 123 consumers signed up in the first month but eventually tens of thousands did and now today the state has nearly universal coverage. they went from one in four people having insurance to uninsured being one in four to 2340u being one in ten. we know the results so to me it's a reminder of what our goal was which is to address double digit increases in insurance rates were preventing people from getting insurance coverage. so to me the issues of the website and software since it's part of a background i've had before, to me it's about writing code and getting things tested and it's very frustrating for andnd struggling for months

months and months to get a scientific way to clean up that resource. that case it's about just getting the code right and making it work and making it function. in that case, governor romney for and got a three month did he clay. i'm not asking you to comment on that. i know the chairman asked to you comment on that. but i think there is no shame in pushing out a date based on technology. that's my opinion. and i want to note that state's own experience has been more positive. one of the issues that was local press was his issue of not having people have to sign up to enter the ite to get data as they call

the amazon model and i'd like to get your comments about that. and then i want to get your comments about this issue of market and ual cancellations. that in the aid individual market only 17% of on an keep their plans annual basis. so obviously there is a huge churn that goes on in that individual market. maybe we don't have a number or today, but it would be great to get that data and if we ave to get it from insurers we should have a number about what that annual rate has been my sense is we are probably following that pretty today. ame people are saying what is normal churn in the individual and trying to site it as the end all, be all problem and anyway to shed light on those issues.

of the the discussion individual market, the data again that continues to be itedes our projection of what would happen with the affordable care account is a look back at market. somewhere between 40 and 60% of turn over on a regular basis. individual market contracts are year so it's not unusual to policy or e same practice a year later. they're an continuous work benefit. individuals who are in the market want to get insurance. don't have a workplace insurance and they're not medicare eligible and not a veteran. they want insurance, and often truggle with not only price increases at about 16% a year average but everyone is edically underwritten so any

illness or disease could block you in the market in the first lace or put you in a pool that could sky rocket and lockout. the protections that the ha that e care act added to the individual market re the very ones that every worker in a small group plan enjoy or in a work site enjoy. locked out because of a preexisting condition. you must be offered the policy. are in a risk pool so your own disease profile doesn't determine your rates. that's really what is happening with that market. of the peep 50% are not in their policies for a year. a third are there for only six months. it is a very volatile and unprotected very marketplace for way too many folks. senator.you, mr. rockefeller. i have e secretary, watched you today and watched eviscerated over in

the house. not for your resignation, your head but your resignation emanated from this panel. it all makes me want to just say some things. number one, i attach some to the fact that this bill which was crafted a lot of committee, a ance lot of it open and in public, when it came to the floor, there was not one single voted for the plan. this was two years ago. more. a little bit and i try to ask myself how could that be possible. son was asking as i would georgia ask about rural west virginia at a st saturday i was rural health center in a very virginia art of west

occurred tocasually me there was $10 billion in a a thousand new health centers all across america. does anyone know that? i don't think in west virginia or generally. prospect unned by the of let's say 100 million people or underinsured, hat the president makes a couple of statements that perhaps he shouldn't have made, the whole at becomes argument. all the letters, i was promised that, and i'm trying to think of all the benefits that this.rom i work very closely with the chairman and others on this bill finance committee to produce it. a magnificent work. virginia don'tst

necessarily share that view right now because i think they have the problem that so many they simply that don't know what's in the bill of the absolutely aniacal and really admirable attack machine including all the television, this has to be the that ever happened to america and then i look at the bill and i said, as you country re the only that doesn't do something like we've done it very well. i think people will get and the under insured insurance and 80% of consumers change their plans every two years. might be more t than that. republicans are talking about provider shock saying won't be able to keep argument whichan

is almost comical and being so you consider en the affordable care account are designed to help people who do health insurance and therefore by definition did not primary care ar physician. single ing every possible dark attack but taking wo statements, taking the website, which is frustrating to all of us, but if there's worked out t can be it would be the website. it's a technology matter and that will happen. i'm not for delaying unless they in time, in which case maybe a penalty should be lifted. i'm incredibly proud of the incredibly proud of ou and marilyn tavern going before committees and getting viscerated but standing your ground and knowing exactly what

ou've done far more than most of us. and certainly far more than most viciously o are making a political attack. writtrisen in the last five years. you can really sour people on ads.ple television it's not that hard to do and give people a chance to -- i your resignation and hand it in today. those things are so unrelated of underinsured or uninsured americans which this bill sets out to successfully period of years actually solve their problems. talk about tax people saying that they're desperate about it and that ct of the matter is

they get 35% of their tax credit of the premium paid by tax credit and after that is 50% on basis.nent you never hear that. you never hear that. so, this is not so much a but a statement of sadness about the ability of the upper body, the so-called body with the cup and the saucer that sort of routine. hat we can be so maniacally political that we just seek to destroy and forget the agony through, e are going which this bill will cure. senator, very much. chair.nk you mr. i thank you for joining us. have shared headlines they've notice theytly or in the past and relate to implementing to

healthcare changes. to that. add we dug up some headlines and one early f as in failure and one is not ready for primetime. a third was confusion reigns. and a fourth headline was pharmacists say some will die. and as you might guess, those headlines from this month or last month, this was rom 6 or 7 years ago when we were implementing medicare part for.hich i voted i was one of 11 who voted for it. had a huge donut hole. fell into f people it. they didn't get any help from medicare. stopped taking their medicines and got sick and sicker and went to the hospital money.st a lot of with the affordable care act we and fixed a problem

and paid for by the industry and created by the original george w. bush proposal which i supported. we're getting a lot o we're hearing a lot of lament about folks who there are a million people who apparently are not going to be able to continue with their insurance policy. maybe it's a substandard problem. as we try to help those folks, let's keep in mind a lot of people in this country call our offices and have policies that aren't worth the paper they are written on and we need to be concerned about those. we need to be concerned about the young people who today would not have any health insurance because they aged out and today they have coverage. i'd have us keep them in mind as well. i'd have us keep in mind the millions of people over the

years who have actually lost coverage, they lost it because of a preexisting condition. they lost it at a time they needed it most. as we work to address the concerns by a couple of million people who aren't going to be able to keep the policies they want and are facing large increases in premium that's a problem. we need to fix that. the other thing we need to put in perspective is this, over in japan they spend half what we do on health care. they get better results. they cover everybody. last night when people went to bed in this country 40 million people went to bed without coverage at all, and we're trying to do something about it. in the end republicans weren't able to work with us. it was sad. chairman bachus cried hard enough. in the end the legislation

signed by the president, a couple ideas are are republican ideas. some good stuff from the republicans came in and found their way into the law. one of those is large purchasing pools, we call them exchanges. i think it was a republican idea. it was taken and tried to incorporate it and make it work. it's a good idea. the idea of the individual mandate, that's as i recall that's a heritage foundation idea that governor romney embraced as part of the law in massachusetts. let me -- looking forward, we've had 10 hearings just before the implementation of law, since the implementation of law on october 1. i think when we were doing this

six or seven years ago, i think we had two hearings, one was four months after the program was implemented and we decided back then not to harass people. we just let them do it and then bring in hearings after the fact. that's what we need to do. can you report to us today on the progress what improvements have americans seen within the last morks what can we see in the next several weeks? >> well, senator, i think i'm the first to admit that the rollout has been excruciatingly awful for way too many people. a lot of people couldn't get in the site in the first place. and then when they were able to access the site, screens would go down all the time. they couldn't get from place to place. i would say those are the two primary areas of focus and we are in a continuous era of

improvement with a rigorous schedule of improvements, we are adding hardware and software to fix the functionality and increase the speed and make sure we are able to handle the volume of people who want to use and access the site on a regular basis. so there have been significant improvements. we are not satisfied at all where we are now. we are committed to an end of november experience that is significantly better on volume and speed and reliance and making sure we get to people. and we have a very specific plan to go back and reinvite people back to the sites who started at one point along the way and may have been so frustrated they gave up. we don't want to do that until we are sure their experience will be significantly better than it was the first time.

we know that a lot of young folks have little patience with any technology that doesn't work instanceously. that audience is particularly important to get a very highly functional site up and running and that's what we're doing. >> now turning to the most patient member of this committee. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you for being here. yesterday, administrator tavenner testified on the security testing for healthcare.gov, which was broken down into testing for the hub and for the federally facilitated marketplace system. she testified there had been no end to end testing on the marketplace. she approved a september 27 memo that to move forward with

issuing the authority to operate. the memo specifically noted this and i'd like to quote it. from a security perspective the aspects of the system that were not tested exposed a level of uncertainty that can be deemed a high risk. were you aware of that memo? >> i was made aware of it recently. i did not know that the memo existed in september. >> how many times did you and administrator tavenner talk about the security aspects and specifically this decision to move forward with the authority to operate? >> we did not discuss the authority to operate. >> did you at any point notify the white house of the security concerns that existed about the exchange? >> i would say that there were conversations, senator, about risks in terms of getting the

system up and running, but i was not aware of this and i did not have these discussions with the white house because i was not aware of them. >> did the white house know there had been no end-to-end testing on the security aspects of the exchange? >> i think the white house was aware of the operational issues involving end-to-end testing and i don't know the specifics of -- again, i did not have the discussions about this authority to operate issue with the white house. >> you testified last week in the house that it was the law that made you stand up the exchange on october 1. in fact, the statute as i read it requires enrollment to start. it does not require the exchange to stand up. were you given different legal advice within hhs? >> senator, what the law says is that benefits started on january 1. the law also said that the secretary shall designate by regulation a date of open

enrollment and that that regulation needed to be promulgated by june of 2013. >> correct. but that did not require to you stand up the website. it required you to open enrollment. >> open enrollment, yes, and a significant portion of open enrollment was the website. >> if administrator tavenner had not done the authority to operate, if she had not signed it, the exchange would not have stood up on october 1, correct? >> that's correct. but it was done specifically she had advice from her senior i.t. and operations team as well as the contractors -- >> so it wasn't the statute that made the website stand up on october 1, was it? >> open enrollment began and a significant part of open enrollment was the website.

>> administrator tavenner testified enrollment target was approximately 800,000. i know your plans are to release that update. do we have your assurance you will break that down? >> i can tell you -- we are working on the problem. and we intend it to give you as much information as we can. you cannot delineate the level of the plan --

>> there are all targets of an roman. it was a memo called for a million people to be and rolled by december. be enrolled by december. i can tell you that the numbers will be very low. the secretary has highlighted the premiums seem to be lower than cbo projected. made onections were premiums, cbo made assumptions, care cost ish directly linked to gdp growth. the assumptions that cbo made was that we would have gdp growth in 2011 of 3.5%. is that gdp growth was 1.8 % in 2011. 2012. 2.2 in

i think it is actually disappointing that in fact premiums have now gone up so far because we have had lots of lee and unique growth in the united -- because we have had relatively any big growth in the united states. madam secretary, i thank you. >> senator, i would comment in terms of the overall, underlying health cost growth in the private insurance market, the public insurance plan, the first two, there was a lot of assumption that the very slow rate of cost increase was due to the recession. most health economists have now

concluded that there are significant cost or strainers that were part of the affordable care act that are having a very positive impact on our health care spending on medicare spending, medicaid spending, which went down last your overall, and private health insurance rates since the affordable care act were passed have been at the slowest cost increase that has been seen in that case. there is now a conclusion that some of the provisions written into the bill about delivery system changes, payment changes, different ways to measure quality outcomes, -- >> all of these were included in the manhattan institute when they analyzed for united states and found that premiums in the individual market increased by 41% under obamacare, and in my

state of north carolina, the manhattan institute estimates that the average increase is 136% higher under the affordable care act. i thank the chair. >> thank you. madam secretary, i think a couple of senators would like a couple more questions. senator hatch? >> i will not keep you long, madam secretary. did i misconstrue -- you said you thought there would not be a lot of people sign up between now and the beginning of the next year. said the enrollment numbers which we were release next week which will be the first month of enrollment are likely to be quite low, given the stroke was -- even the struggles that people at getting access to the site and information. >> you expect the numbers to be very high during the month of november and december is my question? >> i am hoping with the site

improvement we will see more robust numbers. but until the site is fully improved and we really open up the doors wide to a lot of people, we are going to have i think a struggle getting significant numbers to sign up. >> i am not trying to put on the get back to my original concern, why is it so difficult to put this off until we have it up and running, running right and the with the right kind of security so that people's personal and private information is not subject to these fraudsters that naturally come into the system, because we are not prepared. highestite has met the standards of security for the federal government sites. we have taken great care, again, not the store personally

identifiable information in the hall but -- in the hub. we have met the testing >> the testing is going on 24/seven. tested to continue tto the site, because all of the pieces of the system are fully installed and then you can do and to end testing at the very end, but that will not be for a wild. the mitigation strategies are in place. weis ongoing, and haley, and take privacy and security of the american public very seriously. >> don't they have to get the personal information, social security number, what their income is, etc., and is not put into the system? hub,hen they hit the senator, that is actually referred back to databases and social security and homeland security and in the irs, the

federal marketplace will retain application information in case there need to be subsequent determinations. >> don't they have to give that kind of information, no? >> for the application, yes. >> that is what i worry about, because if we do not watch this and have a failsafe system and you admit you do not have a third-party testing unit in there trying to make sure that this -- >> we do have a third-party testing. >> and who is that? >> and tested prior to going live in october. they did sign off on going live in october. they're continuing to test. we have a security team who is monitoring and performing weekly testing a border devices, of theing daily scans monitoring tools, and they will conduct a full security test in

a stable and prior meant when -- in are -- in the stable environment. we do not have the spanish website up yet. it is coming. you cannot do the end-to-end testing until the entire system is set up. >> that makes my case that we should not be getting into this until it is all set up. it would be better, safer, more protective of the people's rights and their personal i guess whatand i'm saying is i think you need an independent testing agency that is not a hired contractor to do this. i just want to raise these issues. as i know this is very difficult for you, and i have appreciated you testifying here today. answer ourwill letters when we send them to you , because i have had letters out

to you that i have never gotten any answers on. we are not in it to give a rough time. we're trying to hopefully get it right. >> i would love to work with you to get it right. >> thank you. senator, that is the main point of this whole hearing, is to get it right. and you just heard senator hatch say he wants to work with you to get it right. i've mentioned in my opening statement that i -- and i'm speaking for at least a majority of this committee -- want to help you get it right. it is a two-way street. you have got to tell us what is working and what is not working. the american people strongly believe in transparency. we do in this committee. the more you do not tell us, the greater the problem is going to be. the more you do tell us, the good and the bad, the more likely it is that we will get this right at an earlier date. i do not -- do not wait until the end of october for telling

us, we are not going to be up therunning in november, first of december. work with us, which is the law. we want to do this right. there are many points of the law that are so meritorious that have not been brought out. one is i believe that the main aim of this law is to reduce health-care costs in this country. we move toward more of delivery system reform, all the parts of byt, in addition to efforts private entities to control costs. we are making headway. one senator mentioned that the japanese health care costs run eight percent. we have to work to get that 18% down. fee foroblems with service in the country. we want to keep working with you. why? because that is our job.

we represent americans. we represent people from all across this country and they want this to work. they do not like the politics in this town, do not like the carping and sniping back and forth. they want the doggone thing to work. let's work together to make it work. next i would welcome that. thank you. >> one comment. there is another party that has attitude, mr. chairman, that you do, and that is republican party in the and thend the house, republican national committee and all of those people that are doing everything they can to destroy you, the president, and they are opposite direction -- and there is obviously speculation about why that might be. they have to cooperate. in other words, what the chairman is saying is that we will do everything we can, and he did everything he possibly could and was unable to on the

floor of the senate get a single republican vote for the bill. , quite far-reaching extraordinary bill,'and i just want to add that they have responsibility to help as opposed to safely criticize in the couple of statements that have been made. --thank you, senator this is a think terrible bill, and that is not because i am a republican or democrat. i have worked as much on health care issues around here in the last 37 years as any number of people. most.ankly, better than i have a desire to have his work. but let me tell you, senator reid i think said it very well. it isically said that

just a step on the way to learn -- on the way toward a single -payer system. that is what worries republicans. i think it worries good democrats, too. and i'm very concerned about this going into a socialized medicine situation where we really, really cannot control the costs, cannot control the system, and we denigrate the system instead of helping it. actually i'm concerned about that, and a lover republicans are concerned about that. i know democrats that are concerned about that. this is not a simple one child political -- one simple on-chip political hacks working at. this is a very serious set of problems. i do not envy you to be in your position and have to answer all bese questions and have to the front person and try to make

this thing work. all i can say is that, yes, i will try to help make it work, if i can. but i do not think it is going to work, and that is a problem. and without costing americans an arm and a leg for my without literally taking people's health care away from them. but i think there are some sincere people on both sides who would like to solve our health care problems in this country, and the president said 85% of america have health insurance, they were satisfied with. why did we not just work on getting the 15% to have the health care that they need rather than -- >> [indiscernible] >> rather than to mobilize the whole system -- >> senators, both, thank you very much, but let's remind all of us to keep our eye on the we arend the ball that keeping our eye on is get this thing working. that is the charge for the day.

given the level of interest, i want to indicate that the senators will have a week to get their questions in, madam secretary, and i urge you to respond immediately to those questions so we can keep moving ahead. thank you very much. the meeting is adjourned. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] yesterday the senate finance committee. today, lamar alexander joined nine other republican senators in sending a letter to the president asking that he immediately relieved secretary sebelius of her dirties as secretary of health and human services. senator alexander has previously asked secretary sebelius to resign in light of the website problems, and today was joined by pat roberts um john cornyn, ted cruz, m nz, jim risch, mark kirk, john brash, and senator

ran paul in that letter to the president. just a reminder that if you missed any of secretary's testimony, we will air it at sunday at 10:35 eastern, and you can watch anytime on our website, www.c-span.org. the senateay on floor, senate minority leader mitch mcconnell responded to some of the secretary's comments on wednesday. he was followed by majority leader harry reid who discussed a bill that passed today that prohibited the visceral nation in the workplace against gay and lesbian employees. their comments are 25 minutes. ve off the capitol. i want to start off this morning by saying a few words about a man who's earned the respect and admiration of countless americans for his energy, courage and faithfulness to a calling that he first received about 75 years ago on a late-night walk around the temple terrace golf course in

tampa. the son of a north carolina dairy farmer, billy graham turns 95 today. and i just want to join all the others across the country and around the world in thanking this good and humble servant for his decades of ministry and his tireless preaching of the gospel that he loves. in a career that spans generations, billy graham has walked the halls of power and counseled presidents and kings, but he's never forgotten his mission in life. and while he may not be able to preach at the giant rallies that made him a household name, he's still finding new ways to share his faith with a world in need of healing, hope and purpose. tonight at the age of 95, billy graham will preach what's been called his final message to america. growing up, billy graham wanted to be a baseball player.

thankfully god had different plans, and ever since that night in tampa he's put his extraordinary natural talents and generosity of spirit at the service of others. billy graham's first crusade took place at the civic auditorium in grand rapids, michigan, in september 1947. in the decades to come more than 400 crusades would follow and more than 185 countries and territories on six continents. at one memorable crusade in south korea, more than one million people showed up to hear the powerful preaching and the hopeful message of the reverend billy graham. billy graham may be the only preacher with a star on the hollywood walk of fame, but he never let that celebrity get to his head. i'm sure he'd say that his beloved ruth helped keep him focused.

and it's a credit to both of them that all five of the graham children are carrying on the family legacy today. as billy graham recreeds from public life -- as he receded from public life in recent years, we've missed the steady reassuring presence that he lent to moments like the oklahoma city bombing and 9/11. but we've been consoled to know that he's still there on his mountain retreat in north carolina. billy graham once said god has given us two hands. one to receive and the other to give with. one to receive with and the other to give with. today i join countless others in sending our own message of thanks to a man who's been called america's pastor. and to say how grateful, how very grateful we are for the life and witness of the reverend billy graham.

now, mr. president, on an entirely different matter, yesterday secretary sebelius came back to capitol hill to testify about obamacare. we didn't learn much from her testimony, but some of the q. and a. was actually pretty revealing. she admitted the number of folks who signed up for obamacare is actually very low. here's what she said about premiums on the individual market: i didn't say that they're going down. when asked if convicted felons could become obamacare navigators and acquire america's sensitive information, here's what she said.

"it's possible." these revelations are really, really concerning. americans were counting on the president's claim that their family premiums would go down, not up, under a new health regime. americans who have lost their insurance and find themselves forced to enter the exchanges, the last thing they need is to worry about some felon stealing their identity. and to many americans, the administration still seems more interested in deflecting blame than taking responsibility for the real harm this law is causing. yesterday's hearing did little to dispel that notion. by now we've heard our friends on the left blame just about everyone and everything for the disaster they forced on our country. everyone and everything, of course, except themselves. they've tried to blame the same contractors they hired. they blame the republicans. they blame the tea party. i'm sure they've even tried to pin this on george w. bush.