we'll turn to senator bingaman for his amendment.i want to note for the committee we have now been in session since 10:00 this morning this we've completed six amendments. we have 350 amendments pending since tuesday. 200 that are still outstanding. we have a total of 550 amendments pending and we have a lot to do. so i would hope that before we break at 5:30, if we can even get two amendments done, it would be terrific, but if we can get one done, we'll be satisfied. senator bingaman? >> thank you very much, madam chairman. the amendment i'm calling up is 202, bingaman amendment 202. currently, the legislation requires all individuals to consent to irs disclosure of tax information for the purpose of being screened, if they wish to receive a subsidy in the gateway. the amount i'm offering would clarify that individuals would not have to consent to such disclosure. but instead could provide documentation that was specified by the secretary. for example, a prior year tax filing or pay stubs from their employer. in addition, the secret

bingaman? >> mr. chairman, let me just respond. i obviously would oppose the amendment based on my understanding of what our choices are. as i understood the cbo testimony, it was that it would be more expensive to cover this group of individuals through the private health insurance system than it would through additions to medicaid, increased eligibility for medicaid. it was also my impression that there were -- there was at least some view that there are some individuals, low income individuals, who are more likely to obtain access if they have that access made available to them through medicaid than if they are required to go out and try to buy private insurance to obtain that coverage. i would just ask david if he could clarify whether my recollection of that testimony from cbo is accurate or not. >> that matches my recollection of their testimony, yes. >> so i think it's a question of, i mean, many of the amendments that have been offered so far have been focused on the fact that we are putting too much money into providing lo

chairman. >> senator bingaman. >> mr.man, let me ask senator merkley, just to clarify my own understanding of his amendments all this amendment is to the establishment of a commission to make recommendations. at the beginning of this process recommendations to the secretary from what should be in the benefit package and that is covered, is that accurate? >> senator, you have stated it very well. under the current bill what we have is a non transparent closed process in which the secretary makes a decision and i am sure the secretary would be lobbied from many directions, but is the thought of many citizens and many participants in this realm of health care that is much better to have a public process, transparent process in which people can express their recommendations. to senator enzi point, this commission has no decision making authority. it would simply serve as a mechanism to collect inside and pass those on to the secretary. >> let me also just clarify that one of the things we've got in the bill and that maybe dav

cbo just e-mailed on the bingaman amendment that would reduce the penalty payments at the end insured individuals would have to make. it increases it $20 billion over ten years, and because of the lower penalty the number of people who would be uninsured under the proposal would be larger than haven't had an answer yet. i spoke to doug elmandorf and there was a possible number for us this evening knowing you would want to engage in this conversation this evening and i'm fully prepared to go ahead with the understanding that i've tried to get the numbers and he may have them by tomorrow. i think we can have the debate and go forward >> i think we should go forward. >> i normally wouldn't go forward because i would presume you would object if you don't have a score on it but if you don't object i don't have a problem moving forward on it. >> mr. cheryl, i would like to say a few words. >> mr. chairman, sorry, have we decided to go ahead because i object to going ahead without the cbo numbers because the difference between a five or a seven-year follow-on biologic with a limited separate

senator bingaman. anybody else who?why don't i do mine, you will do yours and we'll go back to bingaman. does that sound like the way to go? >> thank you. >> i'm going to offer my women's health amendment. mr. chairman, i would like to call-up mikulski to one -- 201. donna and i ask unanimous consent that senator dodd to be asked -- added as a co-sponsor. without objection. i see a man in spain this dividend. i will go on and give a very brief description of my amendment and then can further amplified. this amendment is being offered on behalf of myself, senator harkin, kerrey, brown and don and it does two important things. first it ensures essential community providers such as women's health clinics, community health clinics, hiv/aids clinics such as chase brass and who served low-income populations are included as providers the individuals can go to in any federal qualified health plan. second this provides coverage for women's preventive health care in screenings with no or limited cost-sharing therefore this would

people like jeff bingaman. we get the two bills together. we have been working with the finance committee and put together a strong bill. he's been deeply engaged and i have every confidence. supporting our efforts this president is deeply committed to doing everything he can. he cares deeply about this issue. i've listened to him over again say how much this means to him. on his watch, he's able to get it done. while that wasn't enough to bring it across that finish line i'll continue to work with him. it's a good bill. >> i think we addressed it in the committee. we like the idea that people have choices. we respect that and we'll pursue that. we don't want to sdrim nate on our convictions. the kennedy amendment was adopted. in states of emergency, we don't want someone to be denied healthcare. there's no reason a good part, if not all of our bill, would be adopted. >> [inaudible] >> that's the response of the committees. we have to fix the ways to pay for all of this. a lot of this, we were dealing with our bill. we'll have to grapple wit

mike enzi, orrin hatch, kent conrad, jeff bingaman. is the future of health care, certainly in the finance bill, in whether or not these democrats and republicans can come together? >> reporter: well, this is really a focus, andrea, and if you'll indulge me for a moment, it was like the lightning round watching you and ron. you covered more ground in that segment than i can imagine. >> we have so much fun. >> reporter: and i will not be disclosing any of my holdings during this report. just having fun. the group you talked about is crucial. because you've got moderate republicans and you've got what i would call the timekeepers. this is a group that wants to slow the process down a bit after president obama has said he wants it done in august. the house is certainly pressing. they had their foot on the gas today with committees working over night, trying to get some of their work done on the house side. also, senator harry reid here in the senate, he's still talking about it being doable. but it's max baucus, his finance committee, whe

jeff bingaman did it on coverage. they had 11 or 12 hearings themselves on the subject matter even before a word was written on the bill, to bring people together to listen to ideas and how we could strengthen those ideas as part of the structure of reform for the health care system. and then that culminated with us sitting down beginning back five or six weeks ago now to actually mark up this bill, as we are expected to do. true, my republican friends in our committee did not vote for the bill. i've said that, regretfully. it was pretty clear to me that was probably going to happen no matter what we did. but they contributed and they made significant contributions. of the 161 amendments, mr. president, that we accepted offered by the republican side of the 300-plus amendment that we considered, 161 amendments offered by the minority are very much a part of the bill that i've been talking about this evening. some were technical amendments. but many were very, very substantive. and i will include in the record chapter

it was a 5-3-1-tiered approach similar to a bill that senator bingaman and i also co sponsors and senatormartinez and senator viter, and i'm leaving out another republican when were introduced. and that legislation really is better for competitiveness the 5-3-1 tier mem imiimicking hatc waxman. there has only been one non-industry analysis of the 12 to 14-year issue, 12 to 14-year bill and one other point, i apologize, on the 12-year agreement from last year we also didn't work out the issue of what do you do with evergreening and there was a difference of opinion after we passed it out of committee. never went to the floor because there were differences on to the evergreen 12 plus 12 plus 12. >> we've been working on that, as you know. i know we're working on it, but i would like to see your proposal because my understanding is you want an evergreen 12 plus 12 and more 12s than that, we can certainly talk about that, but the last point, the only real study and the only real analysis done outside of the industry, not by the industry was the ftc report about the innovation issue, and we co

particularly i want to thank senator bingaman, hart, and murray who took on the responsibility crafting the ideas dealing with prevention, quality, coverage and work force issues and did a fantastic job. we miss ted kennedy. he was here in spirit. i talked to him this morning earlier. and he was very excited about this fact that his committee would be the first to mock up a bill and send it to the floor. obviously we need to mail a bill to the finance committee as we move forward. but most important, beyond the relief we feel, for millions of americans, those who have too high a coverage, too high an out of pocket suspense, this is a response to them. they deserve better in a country of this great affluence, of this great ability, with the professional class we have in our health care area we ought to be able to do a lot better than we've been doing. we spend more and get less for a health care system than americans deserve. this bill, because of what we've done, they think is -- we think the -- is going to increase access, reduce costs to individuals and improve the quality of health c

jeff bingaman from mexico -- coverage issue. how do we pay for this? will it reduce costs?hen there was patty murray did a great job of working with these issues. my good friend jack reed did a great job a number of things. and on down the line. bob casey, sherrod brown of ohio. i want to thank my republicans, even though they did not vote for the idea. i mentioned the ideas they brought it to make it a better bill. john mccain, lisa mikulski, orrin hatch -- i'm really going to miss someone here. the ideas that they came together to work. we have a product now. we need to get on the business of working on this. you cannot sustain the present situation. the american people deserve a lot better. the need the same kind of security that we provided for ourselves as members of the united states congress. i do not think the american people are going to upset the notion that they should have to live with the kind of fear and frustration that is associated with having the kind of health care system and our nation, knowing we can do better. i'm thank my colleagues for the work we ha

the issues in the bill, holding a hearing to develop the ideas, murkowski about improving quality, bingamanserving in the kit -- both committees, pat roberts on coverage, with an idea on the pay or play for the employers, making certain that everyone will be covered, murray made a contribution on the workforce, we will get people the health care that they need, the primary health care of the nation. jack reed made a number of contributions that have been worthwhile, and you are working on the biological issue and he was able to achieve what he wanted despite the differences, bernie sanders in increasing the penalties for the people guilty of fraud and abuse, sherrod brown on biologics and other areas. we did not prevail with your idea but this will go forward. casey made great contributions, kay, you hvave helped with these issues and the part-time workers and making certain that they not discriminate, jeff merkley, for the council yesterday to provide the support so intelligent people are making decisions, and sheldon in dealing with the public auction, this has been a significant contribu

senator bingaman just described imported as to the language that says "no provider will be forced toipate." on page 80, we say "the secretary shall negotiate rates for the reimbursement of health care providers." there is no authority for the secretary to set rates. that is just imaginary. the authority that the secretary has under this program is to negotiate rates and the providers are -- >> why this is a higher and lower? >> excuse me. i did not interrupt you. if i could finish my sentence, i would appreciate it. the providers are free to completely produce for dissipation. there is a very strong market pressure for the secretary to negotiate in good faith. the second point i would make is that half of the state in this country, including many of the state of our republican members of this committee, have health care that is delivered through a public plan in their states in the workers' compensation system. it is the only way in which health care is delivered and what you mean. -- in wyoming. the action had a single payer option. nobody is printed about that. that is not what we

not in this picture is jeff bingaman. in the back is olympia snowe. why is so much attention focused on the senate committee? guest: out on capitol hill there are five committees working on health reform for the most part. the finance is one of two in the senate and one really out of 5 working on bipartisan legislation. bipartisan is not so of born in the house because of the super majority but in the senate it is important to get a bill passed to have some sort of bipartisan support and this might be necessary. host: tell us about the house. where do things stand in the energy and commerce committee? guest: is on again and off again and yesterday house democrats won four hours last evening, went through a tutorial to learn what the committees have been considering some of the members can understand what is in the legislation they are talking about. in the meantime, house energy and commerce has been stalled because there are conservative democrats on that committee that really have similar concerns to what the republicans in the senate have, so they

president, on behalf of senator bingaman, i want to make a unanimous consent consent request that jonathan ep scene, a professional -- epstein with the substantial energy, be granted floor privileges for the national authorization act of fiscal year -- through fiscal year 20 106789 3r50 without objection, so ordered. mr. menendez: with that, mr. president, i yield the floor and note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call ththeclerk will. quorum call: quorum call: reid mr. president? i ask unanimous consent the call of the quorum be vitiated. i ask unanimous consent the call of the quorum be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection, so ordered. reid under an order of may 5 and under s. res. 18 i made a temporary appointment of sheldon whitehouse to serve on the "help" committee while retaining my authority to make a permanent appointment to the "help" committee. i now announce as of today, july 15, senator franken is appointed to serve on a permanent basis to the slot occupied by. mr. shelbybysheldon whitehouse. the presiding officer: without objection

and jeff bingaman did the work on coverage issues as well, an important issue of how do we pay for this and come up with ideas that will reduce costs to make health coverage more affordable. and then of course there was patty murray as well who did a great job in working on workforce issues. i see my good friend, jack reed of rhode island who is on the floor, a member of our committee, and did a great job on a number of issues a. effecting the bill. and on down the line. kay hagan, jeff merkley, sheldon whitehouse, bob casey, shared brown of -- sherrod brown as well. i mentioned the ideas that they brought to our bill and made it a better bill. mike enzi, lamar alexander, john mccain, lisa murkowski, pat roberts, orrin hatch, many a going to miss somebody when you start that list. but the idea is we came together and worked and we have a product now and we need one out of the finance committee. but we need to get on the business of working at this in my view. you cannot sustain the present situation, and the american people deserve a lot better. they need the same kind of security, in m

senator baucus, chairman of the senate finance committee, along with senator snowe, enzi, conrad and bingamanartisan solution. my finance committee colleague and our staffs have been working hours and hours each day and night and weekends to navigate through the numerous complex issues of health care reform. has it been easy? obviously not. however, i'm very hopeful that we can reach a bipartisan agreement that makes health care in america more accessible and more affordable while at the same time protecting taxpayers or preventing the federal government from taking over health care reform. president obama in his prime time press conference last week expressed his agreement with these principles. while stating generally the reform he's proposing will keep government out of health care decisions, president obama specifically made the following promises -- quote -- "i'm not going to sign a bill that, for example, adds to our deficit. i won't sign a bill that doesn't reduce health care inflation so that families as well as government are saving money. i'm not going to sign a bill that i don't th

lieberman: i thank the chaimplet first, madam president, on behalf of senator bingaman, i ask unanimous consent that abdullah foroz be griffin privileges of the floor for the pendency of debate on s. 13 th 0, the defense authorization bill, and all bills thereon. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. lieberman: i thank the chair. madam president, i have consulted with the chairman of the armed services committee and the ranking member, senator mccain, and they have urged me to go forward and call up my amendment on the alter national engine and begin to debate it while we're awaiting senator bayh to come over with either his second-degree amendment or side-by-side. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. lieberman: i call up that amendment at this time. officer the clerk will report. the clerk: mr. lieberman for himself and others proposes amendment 1627. mr. lieberman: mada madam president, i ask unanimous consent that further reading of the amendment be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. lieberman: i thank the chair. madam president, this amend

by 17 senators as follows: reid, rockefeller, dodd, specter, durbin, begich, udall of colorado, bingaman, casey, ewe call of new mexico, nelson of florida, dorgan, mccaskill, and gillibrand. mr. reid: i ask unanimous consent that the mandatory quorum be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: i now ask consent that on monday, july 13th, at 4:30 p.m. the senate proceed to executive session and at that time there be an hour of debate prior to the vote on the motion to invoke cloture on the nomination. that the time divided as follows, 5 minutes each for -- 15 minutes each for collins, shelby and vitter, 15 minutes equally divided between senators lieberman and carper. at 5:30 the senate vote on the motion to invoke cloture. then the senate vote on confirmation of the nomination. upon confirmation of the nomination be -- the confirmation be laid on the table and the president notified of senate's action and the senate resume legislative session. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: are we in morning business? the presiding officer: we are not in morning bu

in march of 2002, the senate spoke on this issue voting 78-21 on senator bingaman's amendment which ionsored to study "the known and potential affects on underground drinking sources of hydraulic fracturing." that amendment ultimately did not become law. but in june of 2004, the u.s. environment protection acknowledge gave us the answer with the lengthy report issued which e.p.a. began in late 2000 to determine if underground drinking water sources have been or are endangered from the use of hydraulic fracturing from coal bed methane production. the e.p.a. study of coal bed methane wells is particularly important because the c.b.m. wells are shallower and closer to the underground drinking water sources than other conventional or unconventional oil and gas production. in other words the other production is down much deeper than that used, which uses the technique of hydraulic fracturing. these are deep wells. most fractured wells, they are hundreds of thousands of feet deep. in this 2004 report, e.p.a. conducted a review of all 11 major coal basins across the country and of 200 peer r

senator bingaman chairs the energy committee, and he did a markup over a period of four weeks that was one of the most impressive markups i've seen where he worked with everybody to get this pulled together on renewable energy standard and as such we came out with a bipartisan energy bill on a renewable energy standard. not everybody got what they wanted. nobody ever does. but it was bipartisan and it was in the cap-and-trade bill that just really sends -- and it wasn't the cap-and-trade bill that really sends the bells office for a lot of high-energy-using states. it's what we ought to do rather than what the house did on cap-and-trade legislation which passed by the thinnest of margins, was -- it was basically done completely on democrat votes without republican votes, whereas the renewable energy standard we passed in committee had a mixture of republican, democrat votes and there were even democrats that voted against the bill in committee. but it is a bipartisan process and one that we can do and that we can move forward with. not to mention other things -- and i just met with a r