crapo: mr.president? the presiding officer: the senator from idaho. mr. crapo: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent to speak for up to 40 minutes and to use that 40 minutes in a colloquy with other of my colleagues. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. crapo: i would also ask, mr. president, if you'd give me notice when there are five minutes remaining. the presiding officer: yes. mr. crapo: mr. president, i'm going to engage in a colloquy with some of my colleagues today about the motion that is now pending on which we will vote later this afternoon or early evening. it's simply a motion to commit the bill to the finance committee and have the finance committee make the bill comply with the president's pledge. here's the president's pledge. in the president's own words, "i can make a firm pledge, no family making less than $250,000 will see their taxes increase. not your income taxes, not your payroll taxes, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes. you will not see any of

crapo: yes. as a matter of fact, i in my own mind distinguish between taxes on the american people and fees that will be charged to companies and businesses in the private sector that are also being it i passed on to the amen people. and all of those will occur. one interesting clarification or explanation here is, with regard to this refundable tax credit that is talked about so often, it isn't actually refunded to the taxpayer, as i understand it -- or to the individual who doesn't pay taxes but is receiving the credit. it's paid directly to the insurance company, as i understand it. and so even though some people could be claimed to be paying less taxes by this argument, because some of those who receive the subsidy will get a great subsidy than they will a tax credit, the fact is even they get a tax increase and even they still pay their taxes at the higher level. it's just that some of them will get a subsidy that will help to offset that. mr. alexander: i wonder, too, if i may take a minute

crapo: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent to use the balance of my time as well as that of the leader, the republican leader. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. crapo: thank you so much, mr. president. i'd like to respond to a couple of points that have been made about whether this bill truly addresses what the american people are asking it to address. if you ask most people in america what they want in health care reform -- and they do want health care reform -- what they will tell you is they want to see some control over the skyrocketing costs over health care, particularly the skyrocketing costs over insurance premiums. and they'd like to see increased access to quality medical care. it's been said a number of times by the proponents of this legislation that this bill accomplishes some of those objectivities but let's look at what the congressional budget office told us on the core issue, namely, what's going to happen to your insurance premiums if this bill is passed. and wha

that's why it's important to support the crapo amendment. i know we've had a few votes here where very few republicans hav-- wherevery few democrats he supported republican amendments. this is one i hope all of us could support. mr. feingold: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from wisconsin. mr. feingold: i rise in strong support of the amendment offered by senator dorgan. frankly, mr. president, this amendment should be a no-brainer. it saves taxpayers and consumers money by bringing down prices for prescription drugs. i don't think american consumers should have to pay the highest prices in the world for prurks particularly when those price -- for prescription drugs, particularly when those prices keep going up. brand-name drugs cost on average 35% to 55% less in other industrialized nations than they do in the united states. and the aarp release add study recently that found that the price of drugs most commonly used by seniors has risen faster than the general inflation rate every year since 2004. in it 2007, the price sp

crapo: yes. mr. roberts: that phrase which you just mentioned which is designed to kill the legislation -- and my question has already been answered by the distinguished senator what does it mean, but there are no motions that have been considered or pending, including the pending motion to commit by the distinguished senator. is the motion designed to kill this legislation? because that's what you're going to hear on the other side, and that's just not the case. mr. barrasso: what the senator is doing in the crapo amendment is actually trying to help the american people by taking this burden of $500 billion of taxes off of their backs, off of their shoulders, helping the american people. that's what i see he's trying to accomplish. at a time when with a gimmick they're going to start taxing immediately and the taxes go into play. today's the 11th of december. in 20 days they're going to start collecting taxes for services that they're not going to give for four more years. so it just seems that if a

and the, i believe, baucus side-by side to the crapo amendment. and i would ask consent that we do that, which would give us a way to go forward on two measures that both sides seem to want to vote on? the presiding officer: is there objection? the majority leader. mr. reid: just this afternoon, my friend, the republican leader said, and i quote -- "it is hard to argue with a straight face, we, meaning the republicans, are trying to proceed and amend to have votes on this bill. that's when we desire to do. mr. president, it's obvious that the republicans have said privately, to their friends, and publicly here and to the media that this is a bill they want to kill. to think that they're interested in doing something that's positive about this is -- stretches the imagination. and also, let me just say this, i didn't come to this body yesterday. i'm not the expert with procedures here in the senate, but i'm pretty good. and i want everyone to understand that this is a ploy to stop us from proceeding on this bill. we're not going to have a bunch of a

amendment, which i might add parenthetically has been out there since last tuesday, the crapo motion to commit the bill related to taxes. then the dorgan amendment which is on the drug importation issue, number 2793, and then a mccain amendment number 3200 on the same subject. i ask -- further ask consent that the above referenced amendments be subject to an affirmative 60-vote threshold and that if they achieve that threshold that they be agreed to. further, if they do not achieve that threshold, that they be withdrawn. finally, i ask that no amendments be in order to any of the mentioned amendments in motion. and before the chair rules, i would just like to make a quick point. the majority leader has been proposing a series of votes which regretfully has not held to our pattern of alternating back and forth. we have many people interested in the pending amendments and under the agreement i just put forward, each side would get two votes, as we have tried to offer it throughout the health care debate, and then we would move forward. the presiding officer: is there objection? mr. dur

crapo: thank you. mr. president, i'd like to follow up on the comments of the senator from mississippi, mr. wicker, because it's very critical that the american public understand what has just happened in the senate. when you talk about health care reform, the vast majority of americans have a couple of ideas in mind. first and foremost, they want to lower health care premiums and costs. that's what americans think about primarily when they think about the need for health care reform. they also want to see better access to quality health care and make sure that those who are uninsured have access to health care and those who are underuninsured have -- underinsured have access to health care and that we all have access to quality health care. that's what this debate should be about, but instead the legislation that we see before us does not achieve that. does it reduce the cost of health care? no. it drives up the cost of health care. it raises taxes hundreds of billions of dollars. it cuts medicare by hund

crapo: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that two staffers from my office, rachel johnson and amanda critchfield be granted floor privileges for the remainder of h.r. 3590. the presiding officer: without objection, so ordered. mr. crapo: thank you, mr. president. i believe i have 20 minutes remaining, correct? the presiding officer: the senator from idaho has 17 1/2 minutes remaining. mr. crapo: i ask that the -- that i be notified when i have two minutes remaining. the presiding officer: the senator will be notified. mr. crapo: we will refer my bill to the finance committee and have it comply with the president's promise with regard to taxes. as i said a number of times on the floor, this bill does not correct so many of the problems that we need to deal with in health care. it drives up the cost of health care and premiums, not down. yet raises hundreds of billions of dollars in taxes. it cuts medicare by hundreds of billions of dollars. it grows the federal government by over $2.5 trilli

crapo: thank you, madam president. madam president, i want to speak on both the omnibus appropriations bill to which we've just moved as well as to return and make some comments on the health care legislation from which we just retreated. first of all, with regard to the omnibus appropriations bill, i'm very concerned about the fact that as my amendment -- or my motion is pending on the health care bill dealing with one of the more important issues in the bill -- namely, the president's pledge to make sure that no one in america who makes less than $250,000 as a couple or $200,000 as an individual, will be required to pay for the unbelievably high cost of this bill. and while we were facing this amendment, the majority has decide that they will shift from the bill. i understand that's a tough vote to take because the bill contains so many -- hundreds of billions of dollars of new tax increases that the american people squarely in the middle class will be called upon to share. but we should not have shifted from the hea

to commit, and the side by side to the crapo motion.hese amendments and the motion with respect to h.r. 3590, health care reform legislation. yesterday i filed cloture on the bill we got from the house, appropriations bill h.r. 3288, which includes the commerce, justice, science, military construction, labor, h.h.s., transportation, financial services, state foreign operations. we're going to have at least two roll call votes on the motion to waive with respect to the conference report to date. senators will be notified when these votes are scheduled. mr. president, i would direct this question through the chair to my friend from south dakota. i offered a unanimous consent request yesterday evening that -- to set up a schedule of votes on the crapo amendment and the -- of course the dorgan amendment and last night i was told that the republicans weren't ready yet. are the republicans ready yet to vote? mr. thune: i would say to the majority leader that our leader, the republican leader, senator mcconnell, is on his way here, and i would

crapo: yes, i would. this chart shows the last two sentences of our colloquy when we were in the finance committee. but it went went on for sometime. i was asking the director of c.b.o. whether the cuts to medicare advantage that are in the bill would reduce benefits to senior citizens. and he said, yes. and the reason he had this phrase that said "for those who would be enrolled otherwise under current law" -- the reason he prefaced it that way is the rest of what he said was that for future seniors, it's not going to be a viable option. so they in the future, those who are not on it now, won't have a really significant, viable option to get on it because it's going to be gutted. so what he was saying for those 75% -- by the way, medicare advantage is the most popular part of medicare in america today. the fastest of-growing part of medicare because it is so popular, because it provides these additional biforts that seniors have to pay so significantly for to get in supplemental insurance that aarp is go

both senator crapo amendment and what senator mccain alluded to. he always has his leader time he can say whatever he wants to save it is up to you to hold all of us accountable and i don't think anybody can argue the republicans have been unwilling to debate and have amendments and to vote on amendments. that is so we have asked the majority leader to allow us to do. any questions? >> your amendment and strikes may more as a political card shut amendment. do you separately from this amendment have any related to health care? >> first of all, it is very related to health care and a core part of the bill and the way to explain away the amendment that it is a message amendment but how can it be other than a focus on this bill? this bill increases the size of government in the first full 10 years of spending by 2.5 trillion dollars. even if you're only counterpart the use is gimmicks too not count the first four years and is almost $1 trillion of new spending. that is offset by about $500,000 of new taxes three huge portion of which are paid by people

you see senator crapo left. he has had a pending bill since tuesday. we were in last weekend presumably because the majority felt it was important to try to pass this health care bill. we agreed it's an important subject and we would like to vote. we've been waiting since tuesday and now they pivoted to another measure which the majority leader can do under the rules of the samet and even suggested we take off this weekend. i think i can speak for all republican senators we are not interested in taking off this week and we are interested in staying here debating the measures before the senate and getting back to health care as rapidly as possible with a series of amendments that give the american people an opportunity to understand what is being proposed here and how bad it would be for the country so this is a debate we welcome. we are anxious to get back to it and at whatever time we finish this conference report, it is my hope and expectation, although we don't have an assurance yet that we will not only go back to the health care bill but we will h

crapo: thank you, madam president. as the motion, which has just been read clearly states, this motion would be to recommit -- or to commit this bill to the finance committee. for the finance committee to do one simple thing. and that is to make the bill conform to barack obama's pledge for health care reform and who would pay for health care reform. in a speech that he has given in a number of different places, president obama has very clearly stated, "i can make a firm pledge, no family making less than $250,000 will see their taxes increase. not your income taxes. not your payroll taxes. not your capital gain taxes. not any of your taxes. you will not see any of your taxes increase one single dime." all this motion does is to -- is to commit this bill to the finance committee to have the finance committee assure that its provisions comply with this pledge. now why would we want to do that? i think most americans are very aware today that this bill comes at a huge price. $2.5 trillion of new federal spending. $2.5 tr

mcconnell: i would say to my friend from arizona, we've been trying to get votes on the crapo amendment for example, since last tuesday. it will be a week to. maybe at some point we'll be able to have amendments here. we started off on this bill with each side having amendments, and we went along pretty well until i think the majority decided it was not only better to write the bill in secret, it was better not to have amendments on the bill. so they began to filibuster our efforts to have senators have an opportunity to vote on aspects of this bill, such as the half a trillion dollar cuts in medicare, the $400 billion in new taxes which we would like to be able to get votes on. this is the core of the bill. the american people have every right, i would say to my friend from arizona, to expect us to debate the core of the bill. the core of the bill. the essence of the bill, which is not, of course, going to be changed behind closed doors or during this meeting that's going on, democrats-only. mr. mccain: as i understand it, there's a meeting going on behind closed doors again. there's n

may senator baucus be recognized with a side-by-side amendment to the crapo motion. once that has been recognized to the dorgan amendment as modified. the vote specified in agreement be five minutes of debate equally divided in the usual form upon the use or yielding back of the time. the senate proceed to vote in relation to the lautenberg amendment that upon the disposition of elaborate amendment the senate and with a devoted relation to the dorgan amendment that upon his position papacy developed in relation to the baucus amendment and then upon dismissive of that they proceed to vote in relation to the crapo and motion to commit. no other amendments in the dependency of this agreement and the above-referenced amendment emotions that may be subject to an affirmative 60 vote threshold and that if they achieve that threshold then maybe agree agreed to and the motion to reconsider laid upon the table but if they do not receive that threshold then be withdrawn. >> is there an objection? >> mr. president, reserving the right to object. >> senator from wyoming. >> were

crapo: i thank the senator from tennessee for that question. thank you, mr. president. and very definitely we're hearing from our seniors in idaho who see through this. it is very clear to the folks in idaho that what we're seeing is a proposed massive growth of the federal government by over $2.5 trillion when fully implemented that is to be funded on the backs of the american taxpayers and our senior citizens through cuts in medicare. and in fact, in addition to those who have contacted me who are seeing their cut -- their health benefits lost, i've also been contacted by a number of the providers. we're talking about those who are in home health care or hospice health care, skilled nursing facilities or hospitals and the like, and they make a very interesting point. their point is that not only will senior citizens in medicare advantage, in particular, literally be losing their benefits dramatically, but that other senior citizens who are in traditional medicare will also be losing access and quality of care. and how is that the case? well, we know from the details o

pending is the crapo motion, baucus side-by-side on taxes, dorgan amendment, lautenberg alternative. we have four amendments we need to try to work something out on. it's not done yet but as soon as it is worked out, we'll notify senators. every day we don't act it gets more expensive to stay healthy in america. if you're fortunate enough to have health insurance, this isn't news to you. your premiums have more than doubled in the last decade even though the quality of health care has not doubled. if you're fortunate to have coverage, you might have noticed you're paying at least an extra thousand dollars to cover all the families who don't have health insurance. those with insurance know if their premiums eat up more of their paychecks, they have less money to take home to their families. economists tell us if we do nothing, those costs will continue to climb and climb. economists tell us that that is without question. if we don't do something, the costs will continue to increase. mr. president, very recently the president's council of economic advisors crunched the number, and this

we had a vote yesterday on the crapo amendment that would recommit all the tax increases. many of us don't believe that raising taxes on small businesses when you've got an economy in recession is a smart thing to do. it's going to cost us a lot of job. small businesses made that very clear to us. but i also think that in addition to the principle of fairness that is at play here when it comes to raising taxes four years prior to the benefits kicking in, you also need to have, i think, a transparent sort of understanding about what the costs of the bill are really going to be. because one of the reason that the revenue increases, the tax increases would be gone immediately, or 16 days from now, but the majority of the spending -- 99% of the spending -- doesn't occur until january 1 of 2014 and beyond is to understand the -- understate the true cost of th-fplt they want to bring the cost of the bill in until $1 trillion. going from here to 2019 it ends up to about $1.2 trillion on this chart. if you look at the fully implemented period, and that is 2014 when the benefits an

crapo: thank you, madam president. madam president, as we approach the vote tomorrow morning, i know a lot of people are calling it an historic vote, and in some context i guess it is. however, many of us are concerned that it is an historic mistake rather than a history-making opportunity. we've had a lot of debate about whether this legislation is the right or the wrong way to improve health care for all americans. we've had hours and hours, in fact days and weeks of committee hearings and meetings with good bipartisan discussion on options and ways to accomplish this. but now apparently we have a mandate by the majority that are demanding that we have the final vote in the senate before christmas. while we debate this, let me say i believe we need to hear more from the people who are going to be most affected: the american people. because the final details of this bill were not crafted in front of the american public. i think most people in america today know that the president pledged that this legislation would be

elmendorf, said, when senator crapo asked him during the finance committee hearing, he said approximately half of the additional benefit would be lost to those medicare advantage policyholders? dr. elmendorf said -- quote -- "for those who would be enrolled otherwise, under current law, yes." nearly one out of every four seniors in texas would lose about $122 a month in health care benefits to create a new $2.5 trillion entitlement that their grandchildren will ultimately end up having to pay for. $122 a month may not sound like a lot to people inside the beltway, but a couple from my hometown of san antonio recently wrote to me saying, "please vote to leave our medicare advantage plans alone. we can't afford anything else as our portfolio is wiped out in the stock market collapse last year. my wife and i have had to go back to work, and we are in our 70's." and yet this bill would impose another $122 per month cut in their benefits. another constituent of mine from conroe, texas, wrote "please do what you can to probing the medicare advantage -- to protect the medicare advantage plans. i

we tried to get all day yesterday an amendment by senator crapo and all we heard was we're working ona side by said, kind of parliamentary talk for delay. we're ready to vote. as several of our colleagues have suggested, we keep hearing about these new iterations of this bill. it reminds me at the end of a football game trying to throw a hail mary pass. just somehow, some way find a way to pass this bill. i think it's important for everybody to remember what happens to most hail mays. they fall to the -- hail maries. they fall to the ground incomplete. you get the impression they're far less interested in the substance of the bill than just passing something. when the president came up here last sunday he said "make history." make history? the american people are not asking us to make history by passing this bill. they don't believe it's about the president. they believe it's about the substance. and we're out here prepared to talk about the substance of this measure, offer amendments. and we fully intend to do it for as long as it takes, and as the senator from arizona has suggested,

crapo, no. >> mr. dodd? >> aye. >> mr.gan. >> aye. >> if you want to continue to hear will roll call of votes, go to c-span ii. willmington, north carole. you are opposed to this bill? caller: absolutely. i do think we need to do some things and how much we can sue. but to push it through like they are without a lot of debate and making sweet heart deals is just wrong. they are still pushing the vote through to the point where they push the the vote down so they can go home. host: what kind of work do you do? caller: i'm a bread vendor. host: we heard your senator there vote against the bill. next call from houston, texas. supportive of the bill. caller: yes. just of the fact that more people can get healthcare coverage is a great thing. not only that, we have seen conditions now that get insured. my sister is in the healthcare field and she doesn't even have insurance because it's not affordable. when they said more people are against this bill. who did they interview? they didn't talk to the mother of a child with a pree

crapo, no. >> mr. dodd? >> aye. >> mr. dorgan. >> aye. >> if you want to continue to hear will roll call of votes, go to c-span ii. willmington, north carole. you are opposed to this bill? caller: absolutely. i do think we need to do some things and how much we can sue. but to push it through like they are without a lot of debate and making sweet heart deals is just wrong. they are still pushing the vote through to the point where they push the the vote down so they can go home. host: what kind of work do you do? caller: i'm a bread vendor. host: we heard your senator there vote against the bill. next call from houston, texas. supportive of the bill. caller: yes. just of the fact that more people can get healthcare coverage is a great thing. not only that, we have seen conditions now that get insured. my sister is in the healthcare field and she doesn't even have insurance because it's not affordable. when they said more people are against this bill. who did they interview? they didn't talk to the mother of a child with a

crapo: thank you very much, mr. president.today to discuss the medicare advantage program aga again. it's one that is facing nearly $120 billion in cuts under the democratic health care bill. currently, there are nearly 11 million seniors enrolled in medicare advantage, which is about one out of every four seniors in the united states. in my home of idaho, that's about 60,000 people, or 27% of all medicare beneficiaries in the state. medicare advantage is an extremely popular program. in fact, it's probably the most popular and fastest growing part of medicare. a 2007 study reported high overall satisfaction with the medicare advantage program. 84% of the respondents said that they were happy with their coverage, and 75% would recommend medicare advantage to their friends or family members. but despite this popularity of this program, the massive cuts in the reid bill will result in most seniors losing benefits or coverage, or both, under medicare advantage. i've shown this chart before, and you can't really see the individua

many of us don't support the tax increases in the first place which is what will be supporting the crapo amendment tomorrow to recommit the tax increases back to the committee and hopefully get rid of them. but if you're going to tax increases and you're going to start raising revenue immediately, then you want to start paying out the benefits of the same time or decrease them so they are synchronized. that seems like a fair way to conduct into public policy for the american people. this clearly isn't the case. and the reason it was done this way and let's be honest about it in the newspapers have made it pretty clear that in some of the statements that they've made the "washington post," the measures of the effective date was pushed back by one year to 2014. i represent the biggest cost savings of any legislation to become before the house and at this year but the measures effective date was also pushed back. they keep pushing the date back to understate the costs. the reason they want to start collecting revenue right away and not start spending until later is because they know that if

that is why we will support the crapo amendment and hopefully get rid of them. but if you have tax increases and raise revenue immediately, then you ought to start paying out the benefits of this same time or delayed the tax increases of it are synchronize part of that is a fair way to conduct for the american people. that clearly is not the case. the reason it is done this way in the newspapers have made it clear that the statements they said the effective date was pushed back one year 2014 that is the biggest cost savings of any legislation, but the measures date was pushed back. they keep pushing that date back to understate the cost. the reason i want to start collecting revenue right away and not spend until later because they know that if they start spending earlier, they will start inflating significantly the cost of this and the goal was to keep it under $1 trillion for the they have been acknowledged the 10 year fully implemented cost is not one but two point* $5 trillion. the american people deserve to know the facts. that is a fully implemented cause.

snart crapo? >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. i'll help us get a little back more on schedule and yield back my time. >> okay. let me turn to senator vitter. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> wonder how i'm doing this? i was given a list by the staff when people arrive. it's not an arbitrary decision. >> thank you, mr. chairman. before we get to the question of the actual nomination, i want to suggest that we shouldn't be moving forward with a vote and moving forward with this nomination today and i strongly oppose moving forward today for two, i think, compelling reasons. the first is something that i think is really important for every committee member, our role as senators and that's what senator bunning mentioned regarding the document request and how that has been handled with regard to aig and other bailouts. there are a lot of questions yet to be answered about the loans that the federal reserve made to aig. some, quite frankly, firmly believe that the loans were made in clear violation of the federal reserve act. these loans

snart crapo? >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. help us get a little back more on schedule and yield back my time. >> okay. let me turn to senator vitter. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> wonder how i'm doing this? i was given a list by the staff when people arrive. it's not an arbitrary decision. >> thank you, mr. chairman. before we get to the question of the actual nomination, i want to suggest that we shouldn't be moving forward with a vote and moving forward with this nomination today and i strongly oppose moving forward today for two, i think, compelling reasons. the first is something that i think is really important for every committee member, our role as senators and that's what senator bunning mentioned regarding the document request and how that has been handled with regard to aig and other bailouts. there are a lot of questions yet to be answered about the loans that the federal reserve made to aig. some, quite frankly, firmly believe that the loans were made in clear violation of the federal reserve act. these loans were

senator mike crapo asked this question. he said -- quote -- "so approximately half of the additional benefit would be lost to those current medicare advantage policyholders?" the congressional budget office office director doug elmendorf said -- quote -- "for those who would be enrolled otherwise, under current law, yes." so approximately half of the additional benefit would be lost to those current medicare advantage policyholders. what happened to the president's promise that if you like what you have now, you can keep it? this is another example of a promise that that breaks under this bill, in addition to the $2,100 per-family premium increase for those who buy their insurance on the individual market. despite the fact that this bill cuts $465 billion from the medicare program, it also fails to deal with draconian cuts that will go into effect in january unless congress acts which will further ensure that seniors will be less likely to be able to see a doctor in 2012. we all know this is sometimes called the doc fix, bu

in idaho, mike crapo and james rich. in iowa, chuck grassley. in kansas, sam brownback and pat roberts. in kentucky, jim bunning and mitch mcconnell. in louisiana, david visiter. in maine, susan collins and olympia snowe. in mississippi,ed that cochran and roger wicker. in missouri, christopher bonn. in nebraska, mike johanns, in nevada john enson. in new hampshire, judd gregg. in north carolina, richard burke. in ohio, george voinovich. in oklahoma, tom coburn and james inhofe. in south carolina, jim dementhe and lindsey graham. in tennessee, alexander and bob corker. 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 wi

that's why earlier this year i joined senator mcconnell and senators roberts and crapo in introducing the patients act which, by the way, is supported by the american medical association. and it creates this fire wall to prevent the use of research for rationing. we filed it as an amendment, but of course we're not going to be able to vote on it now that cloture has been invoked. this is the third time this year we've tried to institute this pro-patient fire wall, but obviously we're not going to be able to vote on it, as i said. mr. president, from the very beginning of the health care reform debate, i believed that any bill should be rooted in a simple yet fundamental principle, that every american should be able to choose the doctor, hospital, and health plan of his or her choice. no washington bureaucrat should interfere with that right or substitute the government's judgment for that of a physician. there's nothing more important to americans other than maybe their freedom than the health of their family. and that does, by the way, include an element of freedom obviously. the fre

dish plead with my colleagues to -- i urge my colleagues -- i plead with my colleagues to support the crapo amendment. mr. president, i appreciate your indulgence and i know you are ready to go to your conference, and i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. reid: i ask unanimous consent that the senate stand in recess until 6:15 p.m. today. upon reconvening at 6 :15, the senate continue in debate only for an additional hour under the same conditions and limitations specified under previous orders. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: mr. president, i would also tell all -- everyone here, there will be no more votes tonight. i don't think we can arrange any. the presiding officer: the senate stands in recess until 6:15 p.m. rst-degree amendment. we're working on lining those up. over the course of this debate, there's been too much misinformation about what health care reform is and what it will do. i'd like to set the record straight. the goal of health care reform is to lower costs and provide quality affordable coverage to american families, busin

. >> senator crapo, thank you, very good questions. i'm going turn are to senator schumer. just to nowitzki committee, there is a vote that has started. i announced earlier, we'll come back at 1:00 p.m., rather than having this back and forth. we've got a series of votes here, i don't want to have it be so disjointed. the committee will reconvene at 1:00 p.m. senator schumer. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you mr. chairman. i sat with some this room when we were are told about the imminent collapse of the financial system and panic was in the air. we have lots of problems. this economy is not moving well enough for my purposes or i think anybody's here. but we're not in the great depression, which we might have been. and in the sense, you're a victim in this society when you solve a problem, you're better off than you avoid a problem, even though society is better off that the problem was avided. i think people forget how important that is and easy to criticize, easy to say it could have been done a different way, but at that moment, action was needed and needed quickly

snart crapo? >> thank you very much, mr. chairman.i'll help us get a little back more on schedule and yield back my time. >> okay. let me turn to senator vitter. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> wonder how i'm doing this? i was given a list by the staff when people arrive. it's not an arbitrary decision. >> thank you, mr. chairman. before we get to the question of the actual nomination, i want to suggest that we shouldn't be moving forward with a vote and moving forward with this nomination today and i strongly oppose moving forward today for two, i think, compelling reasons. the first is something that i think is really important for every committee member, our role as senators and that's what senator bunning mentioned regarding the document request and how that has been handled with regard to aig and other bailouts. there are a lot of questions yet to be answered about the loans that the federal reserve made to aig. some, quite frankly, firmly believe that the loans were made in clear violation of the federal reserve act. these loans

. >> csenator crapo. >> i will help us get back on track and yield my time. >> i have given my staffn people arrive. it is not an arbitrary decision. >> before we get to the question of the actual nomination, i want to suggest that we should not be moving forward with a vote and a nomination today. i strongly oppose moving forward today for two compelling reasons. the first is something i think is really important for every committee member with our rules regarding the document request and how that has been handled with regard to aig and other bailouts. there are a lot of questions yet to be answered about the loans the federal reserve made to aig. some firmly believe the loans were made in clear violation of the federal reserve act. these loans were not adequately collateralized, resulting in the federal reserve bank of new york having to exchange debt claims on aig for equity stakes in two insolvent insurance underwriting units. center bombisenator bunning metf document requests of important things like transcripts, minutes, legal opinions, economic analysis regarding these specifi

. >> senator crapo, thank you, very good questions. i'm going turn are to senator schumer.ust to nowitzki committee, there is a vote that has started. i announced earlier, we'll come back at 1:00 p.m., rather than having this back and forth. we've got a series of votes here, i don't want to have it be so disjointed. the committee will reconvene at 1:00 p.m. senator schumer. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you mr. chairman. i sat with some this room when we were are told about the imminent collapse of the financial system and panic was in the air. we have lots of problems. this economy is not moving well enough for my purposes or i think anybody's here. but we're not in the great depression, which we might have been. and in the sense, you're a victim in this society when you solve a problem, you're better off than you avoid a problem, even though society is better off that the problem was avided. i think people forget how important that is and easy to criticize, easy to say it could have been done a different way, but at that moment, action was needed and needed quickly or

crapo: thank you very much, madam president. i'm here today to talk in support of the gregg amendment. i rise in support of my colleague from new hampshire's amendment because it would prohibit using medicare cuts in the democratic health care bill to pay for new government spending. it's interesting as you listen to the debate -- in fact, i was interested to hear my colleague from minnesota say the republican amendments would increase the deficit. they would only increase the deficit if you assume all the spending in the bill that is also opposed by the republicans. one of the key parts of the debate that i think needs to be emphasized here is among all the other things that this bill does, when you have the first full ten years of real implementation of the bill, it's a $2.5 trillion increase in federal spending paid for with hundreds of billions of dollars, in fact trillions of dollars of new taxes and cuts in medicare. and the purpose of -- excuse me, let's go to this chart right here. the purpose of the gregg amendment is t

therefore, i send a cloture petition to the desk on the crapo amendment. the presiding officer: the clerk will report the motion. the clerk: cloture motion: we, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate, do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the penning crapo motion to commit h.r. 3590, a bill to amend the internal revenue code of 1986, to modify the first-time home buyers' credit in the case of members of the armed forces and certain other federal employees, signed by 17 senators as follows: mcconnell, grassley -- mr. mcconnell: mr. president, i ask consent that the names be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: mr. president? the presiding officer: the republican leader. mr. mcconnell: mr. president, now, i hope that we can bring to fruition a consent agreement to allow us to begin to vote. yesterday, against considerable opposition on my own side, i basically backed down and offered the subsequent agreement that the majority leader had offered a fe