cornyn: if i could ask the senator about this other promise. if he recalls the president saying back in july of 2009 that you -- if you like what you ha have, you can keep it. is the senator aware of the fact that according to the congressional budget office that between 8 million and 9 million people who wouldn't have been covered by an employment-based plan under the current law would not have an offer of such coverage under this bill if passed. and seniors, because of the cuts to medicare, particularly medicare advantage, they will actually have their benefits cut. how do you reconcile those promises with what we see in this monstrosity of a bill? mr. graham: they can't be wreck side. i hope american seniors are paying attention to what's going on here. we're going to take $470 billion out of medicare over the next decade and we're going to use that money to create new government programs. so if you're a senior citizen out there, the doctors and the hospitals that you go to -- and they're hard to find medicare doctors right now -- a lot of d

cornyn: the senator -- mr. chambliss: the senator from south carolina raising a point about this bill being revenue neutral and decreases the deficit. how do they achieve that? they achieve that through truly enron accounting, as the senator from south carolina just said. here's what happens, there is a certain amount of money that is projected by c.b.o. to be generated and insurance premiums being paid by young individuals across this country under what's called the class act. the class act is a new medicare -- new health care generated program, a new entitlement program that's included in this bill. and what it says is, and it's going to provide long-term care benefits for young, healthy americans who ultimately are going to become invalid and need that long-term care. well, the fallacy in the numbers game that's being played here is that they are saying c.b.o. -- c.b.o. is saying that it is true that there will be a projection that we're going to say will generate -- a projection that they're using saying we

cornyn: mr. president, we've conferred with the other side of the aisle and i think we've reached an agreement that i would ask for unanimous consent that i be allowed to speak for up to ten minutes and then i believe two senators from the other side of the aisle would like to speak for up to ten minutes each. so i'd ask for unanimous consent to that effect. the presiding officer: without objection, so ordered. mr. cornyn: thanks, mr. president. it shows we can still do some bipartisan things around here still, albeit small things. mr. president, we're talking about the defense appropriations bill, but i think it's important to point out that the majority leader has waited until the very last minute to bring this very important bill up which i'm sure will pass by large majorities, but it was two years -- two months ago that the fiscal year ended. and the majority leader has now left us here eight days before christmas with a lot on our plate, a lot yet to do, and, of course, threatening to keep c

cornyn: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from texas. mr. cornyn: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, i think as the american people are listening to the debate we're having on -- on health care reform, they are being asked to accept some pretty implausible claims. one claim that you can take half a trillion dollars out of medicare and it won't have any impact on the delivery of services to medicare beneficiaries. half a trillion dollars. and the biggest mistake, i think, about the way this bill is paid for with the huge tax increases and with huge cuts in medicare is that the proposal is to let's take half a trillion dollars out of medicare, including $40 billion out of home health care, in order to pay for a brand-new entitlement program when we already know that medicare itself is on a fiscally unsustainable path. well, i want to talk primarily about another aspect of -- of this -- of these cuts, and that is the 11 million seniors, including 532,000 texans who will lose benefits under their medicare advantage program because these are not inconsequential c

cornyn: mr. president, upon passage of the honest leadership -- mr. baucus: mr. president, the senate is not in order. the presiding officer: the senate will be in order. the senator from texas. mr. cornyn: mr. president, upon passage of the honest leadership and open government act the majority leader said and i quote -- "i believe last november americans asked us to make government honest. we have done that. this is the toughest reform bill in the history of this body as it relates to ethics and lawmaking. mr. president, this is an appeal from the ruling of the chair that that provision of rule 44 is unenforceable. why in the world would anyone in this body who voted overwhelmingly to make this the toughest reform bill in the history of the body render this rule toothless by -- by agreeing with the -- with the attempt to set this aside and to waive its effect? i ask my colleagues to make sure that we vote for transparency, for honesty, for open government, and vote no on this motion to waive. m

cornyn: mr.resident? the presiding officer: the senator from texas. mr. cornyn: mr. president, i'd like to pose through the chair a question to my colleague from utah, the -- is the senator aware that on october the 6th, eight of our colleagues on the other side of the aisle wrote a letter to the majority leader asking that when a bill is introduced, the so-called substitute that presumably is going to be revealed tomorrow morning, that eight of our democratic colleagues asked that that legislation be posted for a full 72 hours along with a score or cost estimate of the congressional budget office before they would be required to vote on it? mr. bennett: i say to the senator from texas, i was aware of the letter. i wasn't aware that there were that many democratic signers to it. mr. cornyn: i would say to my colleague from utah, senator lincoln, senator landrieu, senator mccaskill, senator pryor, senator bayh, senator lieberman, senator nelson, senator webb were all signatories on that letter. an

and senator cornyn has gotten up and said that this bill is terrible for the economy.l, let me tell you this, $27 billion of tax cuts in this bill -- let me repeat that, $27 billion of tax cuts for small business. there are billions of dollars of tax breaks for individuals. so for people to stand up and say this isn't good for our economy, i just don't think they understand or get it. if we continue with the status quo, that's when we're in trouble. now, the women of the senate have been very involved, very involved, the democratic women. we have worked together to make sure this package meets the needs of all of our families including the women of this country. and senator mccull sky is on the floor, made sure we corrected a problem that was in the bill, a problem which basically was unclear as to who was going to set the benefits. and we wanted to make sure that women can get mammograms after 40 every year. senator mccull sky fixed it by making sure that the head of health and human services is going to be the one to decide what is covered. and women's prevention has

cornyn: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from texas. mr. cornyn: mr. president, over the last few days, we have learned as we have dug into this bill and the process by which it was written behind closed doors, we have discovered that the bill is chock-full of sweetheart deals. when americans voted to change washington last year, they didn't think it would be politics as usual here, but unfortunately it's sunk to a whole new level. it's painful to me to read the editorials in hometown newspapers back in texas and elsewhere around the country to see what editorial opinion and other opinion leaders are saying about the process by which this bill was written, but let me just read you a couple of lines from the "fort worth star telegram." it says -- "the tawdry use of earmarks to bury the doubts of recalcitrant moderate democrats was a cynical display of end justifies the means horse trading that president obama campaigned against as a senator and a candidate. this was an administrat

republican anger that we saw from john mccain here, we also see republicans saying to quote john cornyn earlier from texas, there will be a day of accounting for this. they believe that the democrats are making a big mistake that is going to eat them alive next fall. what do you think? >> well, this is definitely political, politics of politics. but at issue, they are fighting among themselves about this. and tonight this is something that we've seen scene before, many presidents have tried, seven presidents have tried and if he indeed does get some type of health care reform, it may not be the original mandate that he started out with when he was a candidate for president. but if he gets some type of health care reform, within the next few months, this is definitely a big win for him, for his party, and it also translates into the elections, the upcoming elections in 2010 as well as 2012. >> david gergen, let me ask you a follow-up question on that very issue. i asked you earlier that the republicans keep saying that they are husband selling this through in the middle of the night beca

cornyn, no mr. crepo, no. mr dement, no,. \ mr dodd, aye. mr dorgan, aye, mr durbin, aye mr ensign, no mr enzee, no mr feingold, aye, mrs. feinstein, aye. mr franken, aye. mrs,geillearand, aye. mr graahm, no mr grassley, no. mrñgreg, no mrs, hagan, aye. mr harkin, aye. mr hatch, no. mrs. hutchison -- mr.inhosfe, no. mr noway, aye. mr isaacs said, nope. mr.johans, no. mr. johnson,aye. mr. kaufman,aye. mr. careyaye mr. kirk,aye. mr coles, aye mr. pyle,no. ms landreau, aye. mr lautenberg, aye. mr leahy, aye. mr levin ,aye. mr. lieberman,aye. mrs. lincoln,aye. mr. lugar,no. mr. mccabe,no. mrs. castle,aye. mr. mcconnell,no mr. menendez,aye. mr. merkley, aye. ms. mikulskiaye. mr merkowski, no. mrs. mary,aye. mr. nelson of nebraska,aye. mr. nelson of florida,aye. mr. pryor,aye. mr. reed of rhode island,aye. mr. reid of nevada, [laughter] mr. reid of nevada,aye. [laughter] mr rich, no. mr. roberts,no. mr. rockefeller,aye. mr. sanders, mr. schumer,aye. mr. sessions, mrs. shaheen, aye. mr. shelby, ms. snowe,no. mr. spector,aye. mr stabinow, aye. mr. t

i believe senator cornyn now has the floor. >> thank you very much. adams secretary, good morning. good to see you. last wednesday you testified before the commerce transportation committee post-9/11 and one question had to do with whether you were consulted by the attorney general before a decision was made to try khalid sheikh muhammad and other co-conspirators in new york, rick least attempt to try them there since you know and i know a judge will ultimately decide where that trial will take place, but were you consulted? >> i did not no, i did not talk with the attorney general. that is the prosecution decision as to where and what to bring the case and i believe that is held by the ag. >> and, on i agree that the attorney general is the one who makes that decision at least primarily and of course the president of the united states is going to have to make a decision whether a military authority willen fact turn the detainees over to civilian authorities. ipers them that authority will be granted since i can imagine the attorney general would have announced his decision without

cornyn: madam president, we are now considering a bill that represents the dramatic expansion in governmentspending. as the senator from arizona has so eloquently stated, this omnibus appropriation bill represents a 12% increase over last year, a fiscal year that ended with the largest deficit in american history of of $1.4 trillion. i don't know of any other area in the economy where people are spending 12% over what they spent last year. no family in america, no business in america is spending 12% more this year than they did last year. while we see 10% of our people unemployed. millions of families across the country and small businesses are, in fact, tightening their budgets. but the budgets of these federal agencies, and of the federal government itself, keeps expanding. 33% increase of spending for foreign operations. a 23% increase in transportation, housing, and urban development. one of the worst things that this spending is doing is creating tremendous uncertainty, both here at home and other places like china, which are buying our debt, about whether we are ever going to get seri

cornyn: madam president, we are now considering a bill that represents the dramatic expansion in government spending. as the senator from arizona has so eloquently stated, this omnibus appropriation bill represents a 12% increase over last year, a fiscal year that ended with the largest deficit in american history of of $1.4 trillion. i don't know of any other area in the economy where people are spending 12% over what they spent last year. no family in america, no business in america is spending 12% more this year than they did last year. while we see 10% of our people unemployed. millions of families across the country and small businesses are, in fact, tightening their budgets. but the budgets of these federal agencies, and of the federal government itself, keeps expanding. 33% increase of spending for foreign operations. a 23% increase in transportation, housing, and urban development. one of the worst things that this spending is doing is creating tremendous uncertainty, both here at home and other places like china, which are buying our debt, about whether we are ever going to get ser

hatch: i ask unanimous consent that senator cornyn be added as a cosponsor of the nelson-hatch-casey amendment. a senator: how much time is left on our side? the presiding officer: four minutes, 48 seconds. mr. johanns: i have been on the floor a number of times now debating this issue a while back on the motion to proceed and since this amendment has come out. the senator from utah, i don't believe i have seen a more concise, clear explanation of the history of the hyde language than i just saw over the last half an hour of debate here on the senate floor. you laid it out perfectly. you laid out how we have over a long period of time stayed with that hyde language. that was the agreement that had been reached. now, our colleague from texas said this is a foot in the door, and i agree with her. if this reid bill passes with the current language on abortion, it's not only a foot in the door, in my estimation it kicks down the door. it kicks down the door and sets up structure for funding, federal funding of abortions, and that's what we're going to end up with. now, a couple of weeks

cornyn: mr. president, earlier today senator grassley raised a parliamentary inquiry on, based on rule 44 of the standing rules of the senate. as my colleagues will recall, this was a rule that the senate passed pursuant to the honest leadership and open government act of 2007. and the question had to do with whether the manager's amendment that we're getting ready to vote on complied with rule 44's earmark disclosure requirement. at the time the chair indicated the disclosure list was not submitted. at the time that was about 6:00 p.m. today. my inquiry is: is the chair aware of the disclosure list being made available as required by rule 44 now as we vote in the next 30 minutes? the presiding officer: the chair is not aware at this time whether that statement has been made. the senator from connecticut is recognized. mr. dodd: mr. president, i want to take a few closing minutes if i can. i spoke earlier this evening about the importance of this moment that we all have come to appreciate, i beli

cornyn: thank you, madam president. while our colleague from illinois is still on the floor, let me say to him, i always enjoy listening to him. he's one of the most effective advocates. he's an outstanding lawyer. he and i frequently disagreerks but i always enjoy listening to his arguments. i would just say -- and this isn't what i came to talk about. i'm glad i happened to be here when he talked about the successful effort that we had in texas that we had through medical liability reform laws, to make medical liability insurance more anordable for insurance, and, as a consequence, increase the number of doctors who have moved to our state, including rural areas, which has increased the public access to good quality health care. we've seen in 10 100 counties we an ob/gyn, 100 counties didn't have an obstetrician after medical liability reform, that has changed dramatically, along with other high-risk specialties, that moved to these counties where they were afraid to go due to risk of litigation and what that might me

cornyn: mr. president, i want to thank the senator from wyoming for his important leadership. he's absolutely right. as much as we would all like to be home with our families, and especially at this time of year, this battle to inform the american people about what is about to happen to them is too important for us to simply give up or acquiesce in what the senator from iowa seems to think is inevitable. there is nothing inevitable about this. the only thing i think inevitable about it is in light of the unpopularity of what is being jammed down the throats of the american people, there will be a day of accounting. we don't know when that day of accounting will be. perhaps one of the first days of accounting will be election day 2010. i just don't understand how people who are elected to represent their constituents can try to impose something that is so obviously unpopular with their constituents and expect somehow to be patted on the back and said, well, you're right, you really are smarter than we are. you really do know better than we do what's better for our families and

cornyn: thank you, madam president. madam president, this last thursday was one of those days in washington where the left hand of government didn't know what the right hand was doing. on one end of pennsylvania avenue, the president was posting a jobs summit. but here on the other end of pennsylvania avenue, we continued debate on a health care bill which will, for reasons i will explain, be a job killer and discourage small and large businesses from hiring new people, even though unemployment exceeds double digits. the november jobs numbers show the economy is still hurting. not only is the unemployment 10%, 11,000 more families have lost a breadwinner. more than 15 million americans remain unemployed and more than 3 million americans have lost their jobs as congress passed the stimulus bill in february which failed of its essential purpose, which was to keep unemployment under 8%. according to an article by mortgage zuckerman of the "u.s. news and world report," 21% of all families have an immediate family member who

i believe senator cornyn now has the floor. >> thank you very much. adams secretary, good morning.good to see you. last wednesday you testified before the commerce transportation committee post-9/11 and one question had to do with whether you were consulted by the attorney general before a decision was made to try khalid sheikh muhammad and other co-conspirators in new york, rick least attempt to try them there since you know and i know a judge will ultimately decide where that trial will take place, but were you consulted? >> i did not no, i did not talk with the attorney general. that is the prosecution decision as to where and what to bring the case and i believe that is held by the ag. >> and, on i agree that the attorney general is the one who makes that decision at least primarily and of course the president of the united states is going to have to make a decision whether a military authority willen fact turn the detainees over to civilian authorities. ipers them that authority will be granted since i can imagine the attorney general would have announced his decision without

cornyn: mr. president, i want to talk principally about the medicare cuts in this bill and make sure people understand the context in which this takes place and what it means in terms of benefits for seniors. there has been a lot of parsing of language here in a way that i think can perhaps obscure what the real impact of this -- of these proposals are. but first let me just say there is broad agreement that our health care system needs reform, but i thought the purpose of the reform was actually to lower costs and make it more affordable, not raise premiums, not raise taxes, and not cut medicare benefits. so i would say again to our friends across the aisle no one wants the status quo, but it's clear that our friends across the aisle are not interested in any proposals from this side of the aisle as demonstrated by the party-line votes in the "help" committee and the finance committee and the product coming from the house of representatives. this is simply too important to do on a purely partisa

i believe senator cornyn now has the floor. >> thank you very much. adams secretary, good morning.ood to see you. last wednesday you testified before the commerce transportation committee post-9/11 and one question had to do with whether you were consulted by the attorney general before a decision was made to try khalid sheikh muhammad and other co-conspirators in new york, rick least attempt to try them there since you know and i know a judge will ultimately decide where that trial will take place, but were you consulted? >> i did not no, i did not talk with the attorney general. that is the prosecution decision as to where and what to bring the case and i believe that is held by the ag. >> and, on i agree that the attorney general is the one who makes that decision at least primarily and of course the president of the united states is going to have to make a decision whether a military authority willen fact turn the detainees over to civilian authorities. ipers them that authority will be granted since i can imagine the attorney general would have announced his decision without a

cornyn: mr. president, the president of the united states is reportedly traveling to capitol hill to meet with senate democrats here in just a few moments. unfortunately, republicans are not invited, which is really a -- follows an established pattern here, where notwithstanding the -- the public statements that republican ideas are welcome, they've been rejected at every stage of the development of this 2,074-page bill. party-line votes in the health, education, labor, and pensions committee, in the finance committee, every -- virtually every republican idea rejected. so the president's coming to rally our democratic friends to basically do it a may way or the highway sort of thing. they're going to, of course, tone 1,000%. and i think it's perhaps very timely to recall some of the president's promises, because, frankly, if the president follows the promises he's made to the american people, he won't be able to sign this bill or anything like it. first of all, talking about transparency, he said

cornyn: so, mr. president, i would hope that my colleagues would pass the crapo motion to recommit this so the president can keep his commitment not to raise taxes on the american people. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from minnesota is recognized. ms. klobuchar: thank you, mr. president. i would like to speak in support of the amendment which would provide some much-needed relief to americans who are being brushed by ever higher prescription drug costs. i would first like to note i am eagerly awaiting the details of some of the proposals that were cut out there last night. i appreciate the work of my colleagues, but i do want to hear the response from the congressional budget office, and as i have said on this floor many times, i am concerned about expanding medicare unless we do something about the geographic disparities that are already present in our system. you look at some of the numbers. the average patient got $6,600 in minnesota in 2006, and you look at the numb

cornyn: mr. earlier today senator grassley raised a parliamentary inquiry on, based on rule 44 of the standing rules of the senate. as my colleagues will recall, this was a rule that the senate passed pursuant to the honest leadership and open government act of 2007. and the question had to do with whether the manager's amendment that we're getting ready to vote on complied with rule 44's earmark disclosure requirement. at the time the chair indicated the disclosure list was not submitted. at the time that was about 6:00 p.m. today. my inquiry is: is the chair aware of the disclosure list being made available as required by rule 44 now as we vote in the next 30 minutes? the presiding officer: the chair is not aware at this time whether that statement has been made. the senator from connecticut is recognized. mr. dodd: mr. president, i want to take a few closing minutes if i can. i spoke earlier this evening about the importance of this moment that we all have come to appreciate, i believe, a mome

cornyn: madam president, we are now considering a bill that represents the dramatic expansion in governments the senator from arizona has so eloquently stated, this omnibus appropriation bill represents a 12% increase over last year, a fiscal year that ended with the largest deficit in american history of of $1.4 trillion. i don't know of any other area in the economy where people are spending 12% over what they spent last year. no family in america, no business in america is spending 12% more this year than they did last year. while we see 10% of our people unemployed. millions of families across the country and small businesses are, in fact, tightening their budgets. but the budgets of these federal agencies, and of the federal government itself, keeps expanding. 33% increase of spending for foreign operations. a 23% increase in transportation, housing, and urban development. one of the worst things that this spending is doing is creating tremendous uncertainty, both here at home and other places like china, which are buying our debt, about whether we are ever going to get serious about o

cornyn: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, like my colleagues on this side of the aisle, i voted against the reid health care bill last night because it cuts $470 billion from medicare to create a brand-new entitlement program that will cost $2.5 trillion roughly over the next ten years, a price we cannot afford. it increases premiums for american families that currently have health insurance and who are struggling to make ends meet during tough economic times. and it increases taxes on small businesses and individuals, which is a terrible idea, particularly at a time when our economy is struggling and our job creators are struggling to be able to keep people on their payroll and possibly expand their payroll and hire people back and bring down the unemployment rate. but i want to talk about the way this bill came to pass, at least the cloture vote this morning at 1:00 a.m. i want to talk about the process. i recall that when senator obama was running for president of the united states, he talked about wanting to ch

in texas, john cornyn and kay bailey hutchinson. in utah, robert bennett and orrin hatch. in wyoming, john bo rah sew and michael enby. please remember these names. these are people who have stole health care for this country -- who have staaled health care in this country. they watched as day after day, month after month, people get sick and even die because they have no health coverage. i assure each and every one of you that have done anything to obstruct health care, people will remember. maybe not the people who die, but the people who loved them. the people whose names i read at our website, namesofthedead.com. these are people who are gone but the names, the list grows every single day until we solve this problem. then in the end, when we do solve this problem, and it's inevitable, every other industrial country in the entire world has health insurance for everyone, when we do join the ranks of those countries, people are going to remember who made that happen and show kindness and love to them. people are going to remember who blocked it and they'll show undying ha

i think it's senators feinstein and cornyn.sed a commission that would focus on the three major entitlement programs -- social security, medicare and medicaid. they argue that those three programs are the big cost drivers in the budget and that it would be best to try to have a more narrow focus and get a consensus on what to do with those three programs. what's your reaction to that approach? >> my reaction is i think you also have to have revenue on the table. and i say that because as i analyze our current revenue system, it is inefficient, it's unfair and it's hurting the competitive position of the country. i say that because by my calculations, we're only collecting about 76% of what's actually owed under the current system. we have an extraordinarily in effect system that's hindering revenue to offshore tax havens, to abusive tax shelters, the tax gap. i think we are going to have to fundamentally change the tax code in light of the world we live in today. our tax system was constructed at a time where we didn't have to

senator john cornyn -- with medicating such poor outcomes compared to private care, -- medicaid be ine care, we ought to go to medicate. the government now controls 60% of health care. if you look at when the hyper inflation started with health care, it started with government programs. if you look at where we're going based on the curve, our premiums are going to rise faster, not slower, if we pass the present bill. that is not really fair to senator reid because we do not know what thea.uk present bills dead. we know the bill heat -- we do not know what the present bill is yet. we know what the bill is on the floor. cost is what to nice people access. but in the name of cost, -- cost is what denies people access, but in the name of cost, we ought to go after what is bad. the proposals we have seen have gone after what is good in the name of fixing it. when you put a bill up that has 70 new government programs that will require 20,000 new federal employees, 1600 -- the secretary is going to read the regulation -- write the regulation -- that is the last thing we need, more rules and

i think it's senators feinstein and cornyn. they have proposed a commission that would focus on the three major entitlement programs -- social security, medicare and medicaid. they argue that those three programs are the big cost drivers in the budget and that it would be best to try to have a more narrow focus and get a consensus on what to do with those three programs. what's your reaction to that approach? >> my reaction is i think you also have to have revenue on the table. and i say that because as i analyze our current revenue system, it is inefficient, it's unfair and it's hurting the competitive position of the country. i say that because by my calculations, we're only collecting about 76% of what's actually owed under the current system. we have an extraordinarily in effect system that's hindering revenue to offshore tax havens, to abusive tax shelters, the tax gap. i think we are going to have to fundamentally change the tax code in light of the world we live in today. our tax system was constructed at a time where we

. >> senator cornyn has the >> tha >> >> madame secretary. adsecretar good morning. ednesd you tesu. last wednesday you testified before the security challenges post 9/11 and one question had to do with deether you were consulted by the attorney general before the decision was made iratry call the sheik muhammed and other co-conspirators and new york since yo or at least them to try them there. cents a judge will altman they decide where that child will take place. were you consulted? >> no. that is a prosecution decision as to where and what did you to bring a case td i think that is properly held by the attorney general onei read the attorney general makes that decision preliminarily. to harse, the president of united states has to make a itarsion whether the military authorities will turn these it detainee's two civilian authorities. the aney gene authority will be granted since i cannot icat thethe attorney general would not have announced haveout least he had , iicated he would agree. e of te question i have, i ask the attorney general of uhe immigration related

. >> there is consent senator cornyn has co-sponsored the hatch pc amendment -- >> how much time is left on our site? >> let me say i have been on the floor in number of times now debating this issue a while that on the motion to proceed and since this amendment has come out, the senator from utah i don't believe i have seen a more concise clear explanation of the history of the hyde language than i just sold over the last half the number of debate on the senate floor. you leave it out perfectly. you laid out how we have over a long period of time stayed with that hyde language. that was the agreement that had been reached. our colleague from texas said this is a foot in the door and i agree with her. if this bill passes with the current language on abortion it's not only a foot in the door in my estimation it kicks down the door. it kicks down the door and sets up structure for funding, federal funding of abortions. and that is why we are guinn to end up with. a couple of weeks ago i came to the floor when we were debating the motion to proceed and i said at that time you know, to me th

cornyn: mr. president, the president of the united states is reportedly traveling to capitol hill to meet with senate democrats here in just a few moments. unfortunately, republicans are not invited, which is really a -- follows an established pattern here, where notwithstanding the -- the public statements that republican ideas are welcome, they've been rejected at every stage of the development of this 2,074-page bill. party-line votes in the health, education, labor, and pensions committee, in the finance committee, every -- virtually every republican idea rejected. so the president's coming to rally our democratic friends to basically do it a may way or the highway sort of thing. they're going to, of course, tone 1,000%. and i think it's perhaps very timely to recall some of the president's promises, because, frankly, if the president follows the promises he's made to the american people, he won't be able to sign this bill or anything like it. first of all, talking about transparency, he said

in 2007, senator cornyn and gregg introduced an amendment to reduce medicare spending b by $33.8 billion under the reconciliation instructions. it got 23 votes. i remember not long ago the republican majority proposed reducing medicare b by $10 billion. not one member of the democratic senate voted for that reduction. they had to fly the vice president back from pakistan to break a tie. over $10 billion. so my argument is quite simple to the american people. we're not going to reduce medicare by $464 billion. and if we don't do that, the bill is not paid for. and that creates a problem of monumental proportions. if we did reduce medicare b by $464 billion, and took the money out of medicare to create another government program, we have done a very dishonest thing to seniors. we're dammed if -- damned if we do and damned if we don't. during the whole campaign, i don't remember anybody suggesting that you needed to cut medicare to create medicare reform for not medicare services. but that's exactly what we're doing. now to my democratic colleagues, there will come a day when republicans an

i think it's senators feinstein and cornyn.oposed a commission that would focus on the three major entitlement programs -- social security, medicare and medicaid. they argue that those three programs are the big cost drivers in the budget and that it would be best to try to have a more narrow focus and get a consensus on what to do with those three programs. what's your reaction to that approach? >> my reaction is i think you also have to have revenue on the table. and i say that because as i analyze our current revenue system, it is inefficient, it's unfair and it's hurting the competitive position of the country. i say that because by my calculations, we're only collecting about 76% of what's actually owed under the current system. we have an extraordinarily in effect system that's hindering revenue to offshore tax havens, to abusive tax shelters, the tax gap. i think we are going to have to fundamentally change the tax code in light of the world we live in today. our tax system was constructed at a time where we didn't have

four republican speakers be recognized be senator johanns, senator roberts, senator hutchison and cornyn, the democrats to speak in alternate fashion much the next democratic slot will be senator murray and cantwell to speak on the tragic shooting at washington. those senators count as 1 democratic speaker -- as one democratic speaker and following senator roberts, that i be recognized. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection, so ordered. mr. enzi: mr. president, i would yield to the senator from nebraska then. the presiding officer: the senator from nebraska. mr. johanns: mr. president, i rise today to speak in support of the mccain amendment. i've been down here for a while and i've listened to the debate on the medicare cuts and you know what strikes me about this debate is that reality sets in. it just simply does. there will be a point at which hospitals, hospice programs, skilled nursing facilities are going to see less money. i mean, that's just simply the reality of what we're debating here today. it's kind of remarkable to me that you could go from a period

hatch: i ask unanimous consent that senator cornyn be added as a cosponsor of the nelson-hatch-casey amendment. a senator: how much time is left on our side? the presiding officer: four minutes, 48 seconds. mr. johanns: i have been on the floor a number of times now debating this issue a while back on the motion to proceed and since this amendment has come out. the senator from utah, i don't believe i have seen a more concise, clear explanation of the history of the hyde language than i just saw over the last half an hour of debate here on the senate floor. you laid it out perfectly. you laid out how we have over a long period of time stayed with that hyde language. that was the agreement that had been reached. now, our colleague from texas said this is a foot in the door, and i agree with her. if this reid bill passes with the current language on abortion, it's not only a foot in the door, in my estimation it kicks down the door. it kicks down the door and sets up structure for funding, federal funding of abortions, and that's what we're going to end up with. now, a couple of weeks

senator john cornyn -- with medicating such poor outcomes compared to private care, -- medicaid be in such poor outcomes compared to private care, we ought to go to medicate. the government now controls 60% of health care. if you look at when the hyper inflation started with health care, it started with government programs. if you look at where we're going based on the curve, our premiums are going to rise faster, not slower, if we pass the present bill. that is not really fair to senator reid because we do not know what thea.uk present bills dead. we know the bill heat -- we do not know what the present bill is yet. we know what the bill is on the floor. cost is what to nice people access. but in the name of cost, -- cost is what denies people access, but in the name of cost, we ought to go after what is bad. the proposals we have seen have gone after what is good in the name of fixing it. when you put a bill up that has 70 new government programs that will require 20,000 new federal employees, 1600 -- the secretary is going to read the regulation -- write the regulation -- that is