mr. alexander: mr. president, i agree with the senator from montana. that's why it's for the that the that we have 22 minutes on the republican side to clear up some misconceptions. the democratic health care bill does cost $2.5 trillion over ten years when it's fully implemented. it's, if i may say so, arrogant to think that the american people couldn't figure out the difference between the first ten years when the bill wasn't implemented in four of those years and they'd like know that it costs $2.5 trillion. mr. baucus: would the senator yield for a question? mr. alexander: if it is on your side, i'll yield. mr. baucus: is it paid for? mr. alexander: the senator is right. that's the subject i would like to talk about. it is paid for by cutting grandma's medicare. it's paid for by cutting grand grandma's medicare by $465 million over a ten-year period of time, the -- mr. baucus: that's a debate -- that's a second question i'd love to debate with you, but on the first question only, you do admit that i

mr. alexander: mr. president, i agree with the senator from montana. that's why it's for the that the that we have 22 minutes on the republican side to clear up some misconceptions. the democratic health care bill does cost $2.5 trillion over ten years when it's fully implemented. it's, if i may say so, arrogant to think that the american people couldn't figure out the difference between the first ten years when the bill wasn't implemented in four of those years and they'd like know that it costs $2.5 trillion. mr. baucus: would the senator yield for a question? mr. alexander: if it is on your side, i'll yield. mr. baucus: is it paid for? mr. alexander: the senator is right. that's the subject i would like to talk about. it is paid for by cutting grandma's medicare. it's paid for by cutting grand grandma's medicare by $465 million over a ten-year period of time, the -- mr. baucus: that's a debate -- that's a second question i'd love to debate with you, but on the first question only, you do admit that i

mr. alexander: mr. president? the presiding officer: under the previous order, the senate will resume consideration of the house message with respect to h.r. 3326, which the clerk will report. the clerk: house message to accompany h.r. 3326, an act making appropriations for the department of defense for the fiscal year ending september 30, 2010, and for other purposes. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the time until 7:20 a.m. shall be divided equally and controlled between the two leaders or their designees, with the final ten minutes reserved for the two leaders and with the final five minutes controlled by the majority leader. mr. reid: mr. president? the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. reid: it's my understanding the time until -- let's see, until 7:10 is equally divided and controlled, is that right? the presiding officer: the senator is correct. mr. reid: i designate the majority whip, the senator from illinois, dick dinner, to have control of that ten minutes -- dick durbin, to ha

mr. alexander: mr. president, my understanding of the proposal by the finance committee bill and by the reid bill is that the federal government expands medicaid and pays for 100% of it for a few years, but after that the state has a significant portion of the bill. am i not correct in that, while keeping the floor. mr. baucus: this is a colloquy, so we have to divide this time up. we're only talking about -- mr. alexander: i'm not going to divide the time up, mr. president. mr. baucus: is that a rhetorical question or is that an actual question? mr. alexander: mr. president, i'll retain the floor and i'll make the statement. the senator can make his statement later then. the fact of the matter is that after three or four years the federal government sends a big bill to the state. the fact of the matter is the governor of tennessee, who is a democrat and who has worked with other governors and is actually leading the national governors association effort to see the impact of this kind of legislation on

mr. alexander: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from tennessee. mr. alexander: mr. president, i intend to take ten minutes of the republican time. will you please let me know when one minute remains. the presiding officer: the senator will be notified. mr. alexander: i thank you, mr. president. mr. president, there may be a number of americans who are switching over from the minnesota v. carolina football game and they may be wondering what in the world is the united states senate doing coming into session at midnight on a sunday in the middle of a snowstorm and getting ready to vote at 1:00 a.m. so let me try to explain that for just a moment. the reap is that the majority leader, the democratic majority leader, who's the only one that can set our schedule, showed up yesterday with a 400-page amendment. yesterday. this amendment had been written in secret for the last six weeks. the assistant democratic leader said last week on the floor he had no idea what was in it. of course, none of us on the republican side knew what was in it. so almost no one here knew what

mr. alexander: we have a couple minutes remaining in our time. i wonder if the senator from georgia, having heard the comments, has additional reflections. mr. chambliss: i'd like to ask a question of the senator from wyoming who is a medical doctor, who prior to coming to the senate was an active orthopedic surgeon. i've had physicians come to my office in droves and talk to me about medicare before we got into this health care debate. what i've heard is in reference to the reimbursement rate being so low. in fact, the american hospital association has come out just in the last 24 hours and pointed out that hospitals across the nation get a return of about 91 cents for every dollar of care provided. that's not 91 cents of the amount of charges from the hospital to medicare. it's 91 cents of the cost of the care provided. so the return is about 10% less to a hospital than the cost that the hospital has in it. and my understanding is that at least 10% less than the cost provided for a physician is reimbursed to the physician under medicare. and as

mr. alexander: mr. president, during the next 55 minutes, we'll have several republican senators come to the floor. and i ask unanimous consent that during that time senator mccain be allowed to be the manager of a colloquy among the republican senators. thank you, mr. president. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. alexander: before senator mccain begins, i'd like to, if i may, take a moment just to establish where we are today, what happened yesterday, and as a lead-in to what he's about to discuss. yesterday senator mccain offered an amendment on the floor of the senate that would do two things. it would send back to the finance committee this, the democratic health care bill, which is the 2,000-page bill right here. and it would say to them, one, take out the cuts in medicare. and, two, any savings in medicare must go to make medicare more solvent. that was the mccain amendment. that was defeated. 58 democrats said yes to the cuts in medicare. they said no to using -- they said yes to using

mr. alexander: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from tennessee. mr. alexander: i want to cliewt the senator from arizona -- i want to congratulate th the senator from arizona. i heard the senator talk about figures. we have some figures and the democrats have other figures. i agree with him. i think someone watching this must think we're on two different planets sometimes. but -- so let me focus in on the figures. i believe i heard you say that to pay for this health care bill over ten years there would be $465 billion in medicare cuts. now, where does that figure come from? mr. kyl: mr. president, i had say to my friend from tennessee, first of all, it comes from a reading of the bill. it's very clear in the bill as to how much money is taken from medicare and the number that the senator from tennessee just articulated is the correct number. in addition to that, the congressional budget office and the joint tax committee analyzed the specific numbers and obviously they were given the numbers in the bill, but the numbers that they are using are -- and

mr. alexander: let me ask that the senator from south dakota lead the colloquy on the republican side. r. mccain: i would say to my friend, apparently if the news reports are right, that the public option and medicare is out, that's an interesting twist. and, again, i think affirmation, they're just throwing things against the wall to see if it sticks. but it doesn't change the core of the bill, which the senator from south dakota has been so eloquent about and that is a half a trillion dollars in cuts to medicare and increases in taxes. so you take the public option in or out, it still doesn't change the fundamental fact that it's going to restructure health care in america and do nothing to reduce the costs and nothing to improve the quality. i just wanted to comment to ask a comment of the senator from south dakota. and by the way, could i just mention, i haven't quite seen anything on the floor of the senate as i saw the senator from south dakota challenged earlier today. i was watching proceedings on the floor. i wonder if the senator from south dakota would like to maybe respond t

mr. alexander: -- mr.coburn: i would answer my colleague as someone who has practiced medicine for 25 years. medpac last year sid 29% of medicare beneficiaries it surveyed were looking for a primary care doctor and had great difficulty in finding somebody to treat them. well, that's now. in the state of texas 58% of the state's doctors took new medicare patients but only 38% of the state's primary care doctors took new medicare patients. i would make the case to you that if you delay care, that's denied care. and it's exacerbated in our older population. because an older person with a medical need is much more susceptible to the complications that can come from that initial problem. so if you delay the care, you're denying the cares, and you're actually increasing the cost. so if you add -- there's 15 million people in this population. i have no idea if there are plans to include all of them. but if you add 15 million new people to medicare, what you'll have is 50% aren't going to find a primary care physi

mr. alexander: i wonder if the senator is aware, in alabama there's 181,000 people who are going to get the. in california, 1,106,000 people, seniors, are going to have their benefits cut. mr. coburn: colorado, 19 l,000 that are going to have their benefits cut. georgia 176,000, illinois is 176,000, indiana 148,000, kentucky 110,000, louisiana 151,000, massachusetts 200,000, michigan, 406,000. that's exactly what michigan needs right now, isn't it? for their seniors to have their benefits cut. minute missouri 200,000, nevada, 400,000 of, state of new york, 853,000, ohio, 499,000, oregon 250,000, pennsylvania, maybe, maybe not, because they may have got the deal, 865,000; tennessee 233,000 according to my numbers; washington state 225,000; wisconsin 243,000. i'd ask unanimous consent the list of what the enrollment is by the c.m.s. on medicaid and medicare advantage enrollment as of august 2009 be placed in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mccain: and the point of all of this that the senator from florida, a member of the finance committee, felt so strongly that medi

mr. alexander: it clearly does. it enjoys wide support everywhere except the united states senate where when senator enzi brought it up it was rejected by our friends on the other side. mr. thune: the one thing that strikes me about this proposal that is in totality 2,700 pages is that it doesn't enjoy support from any small business organization that i'm aware of. maybe there's some out there i can't speak, but i do know that the organizations that represent small businesses that we're all aacquainted with -- the national federation of independent business, chamber of commerce, national association of wholesaler distribute tors, builders and contractors, electric contractors, franchise association, they go right down the list; all say that this does nothing to lower their costs. in fact, it increases the cost of doing business, increases the cost of health care. what they have argued repeatly is one of the suggestions that the senator from tennessee mentioned, small business health plans would in fact drive their he

mr. alexander, and the senator from oklahoma, mr. coburn, and senator enzi, and senator crapo, unanimous consent that we engage in a colloquy. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection, so ordered. the minority has three minutes and 42 seconds and then on top of that at -- at 2:00, the senator from arizona controls 17 1/2 minutes. mr. mccain: thank you. i'll just let those minutes run together if there's no objection. mr. mccain: mr. president -- the presiding officer: without objection, so ordered. mr. mccain: i want to begin our conversation with a brief comment about the american association of retired persons known as the aarp, who has now come out against this amendment incredibly. and it's a fascinating history of that liberal democratic group because in 1993 they stated when we had some savings in medicare we had -- we had some savings in medicare in 1993, the aarp said -- quote -- "if we're talking about medicare cuts alone as a way of financing health reform, we would fight that with all of our strength. w

mr. alexander. >> no. >> mr. alexander, no. >> reporter: clearly exhausted from weeks of marathon negotiations, majority leader harry reid mistakenly voted no before realizing his mistake and changing his vote. >> mr. reid of nevada. >> no. ( laughter ) ( applause ) >> mr. reid of nevada. aye. >> the yays are 60, the nays are 39. h.r. 3590 as amended-- the patient protection and affordable care act-- is passed. ( applause ) >> through 24 days of grueling debate, republicans had done everything they could to stop the bill, and they warned it's not over. minority leader mitch mcconnell: >> i guarantee you that people who voted for this bill are going to get an earful when they finally get home for the first time since thanksgiving. >> reporter: but democratic leaders were triumphant as they spoke to reporters afterward. >> this is a victory because we've affirmed that the ability to live a healthy life in our great country is a right and not merely a privilege for the select few. i look forward to working with my fr

mr. alexander: well, i thank the senator from arizona. i was thinking when i listened to the -- i wonder if the senator noticed the california governor's comments on sunday. governor schwarzenegger said that he supports the idea of overhauling health care, but -- quote --"the last thing we need said governor schwarzenegger is another $3 billion in spending. he was referring to one of the unintended consequences of this bill which is the big state costs of medicaid being shifted to the states. here's governor schwarzenegger's advice following up the comments of the leader. so i would say be very careful to the federal government. this is from the govern or of california. before you go to bed with all of this, let's rethink it, said governor schwarzenegger. there is no rush from one second to the next. let's take another week or two. let's come up with the right package. i wonder if the senator saw this. mr. mccain: i thank the governor of tennessee. i recognize that you understand this better than anyone having been a governor and realizin

mr. alexander: this isn't very hard to understand. i mean, the proposal is to take 16%, 17% of our economy, affecting 300 million americans. nothing could be more personal, as the kentucky senator has said, than our health care. and we don't have the bill. we do not have the bill. it's being written in secret in another room. and if there's any part of this debate that went through to every single household in america, i believe it was when the finance committee voted down the motion, the democrats voted down a motion that the bill should be on the web for 72 hours so the american people could see the text, know what it costs and know how it affects them. eight democratic senators then wrote the democratic leader and said we want to insist that we know what the text is, that we have the official score from the congressional budget office, and that we have it for 72 hours before we move to vote. now, we don't have the bill. we don't have the official score from the congressional budget office. 72 hours is three more days. even though e

mr. alexander: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from tennessee. mr. alexander: mr.i intend to take ten minutes of the republican time. will you please let me know when one minute remains. the presiding officer: the senator will be notified. mr. alexander: i thank you, mr. president. mr. president, there may be a number of americans who are switching over from the minnesota v. carolina football game and they may be wondering what in the world is the united states senate doing coming into session at midnight on a sunday in the middle of a snowstorm and getting ready to vote at 1:00 a.m. so let me try to explain that for just a moment. the reap is that the majority leader, the democratic majority leader, who's the only one that can set our schedule, showed up yesterday with a 400-page amendment. yesterday. this amendment had been written in secret for the last six weeks. the assistant democratic leader said last week on the floor he had no idea what was in it. of course, none of us on the republican side knew what was in it. so almost no one here knew what was in it. i

mr. alexander: i agree with the senator from south dakota.this is people who might be watching this must be thinking, wait a minute here, and let me just ask the two members of the finance committee, i mean, isn't it true -- what they're trying to say is that a medicare cut is not a medicare cut and that a tax increase is not a tax increase and that a premium increase is not a premium increase. i mean, isn't it true that when the bill is fully implemented there will be nearly $1 trillion in medicare cuts? and isn't it true that there will be nearly about $1 trillion when fully implemented in new taxes? isn't it true that the congressional budget office has said that's all going to be passed on to people? and isn't it true that that all starts in january if the bill passes? and isn't it also true the congressional budget office has said that premiums are going to continue to go up, and for people, the individual market they're going to go up even more? isn't that all true? mr. crapo: i'll respond first. the senator from tennessee is exactly ri

mr. alexander: i thank you, mr. president. mr. there may be a number of americans who are switching over from the minnesota v. carolina football game and they may be wondering what in the world is the united states senate doing coming into session at midnight on a sunday in the middle of a snowstorm and getting ready to vote at 1:00 a.m. so let me try to explain that for just a moment. the reap is that the majority leader, the democratic majority leader, who's the only one that can set our schedule, showed up yesterday with a 400-page amendment. yesterday. this amendment had been written in secret for the last six weeks. the assistant democratic leader said last week on the floor he had no idea what was in it. of course, none of us on the republican side knew what was in it. so almost no one here knew what was in it. it was presented to us and then the democratic leader said, well, we're going to start voting on it and we're going to pass it before christmas. now, this is an amendment to the health care bill which when fully imple

mr. alexander: under the republican time, senator wyoming, senator barrasso, will lead a colloquy and askr permission to do that concerning senator gregg's amendment which we'll be talking about this afternoon making clear to the american people that this democratic health care bill is being paid for by waiting -- by treating medicare as a piggy bank. but before we do that, i wanted to say briefly something in response to the majority leader's comments. he -- the majority leader said that the republican leader had said that the democratic health care bill is arrogant. it is historic in its arrogance. it is arrogant to think that we are wise enough -- we 100 senators are wise enough in a 2,000-page bill to completely turn upside down and change a comprehensive health care system that affects nearly 300 million americans, 16% or 17% of our economy, all at once. it is arrogant for us to imagine that the american people aren't wise enough to see through the proposals in this bill, which are to transfer millions more americans into a medicaid program for low-income people that none of us would

mr. alexander: we have our usual situation here on the republican side. a lot of senators wish to speak on the subject of medicaid. i'm going to keep my remarks briefly. but looking around, i see one, two, three, four of us have been governors of a state. the presiding officer was governor of the state of virginia. senator corker himself was mayor of chattanooga and the chief operating officer of our state government. why do i bring that up? because the medicaid program that we're discussing -- and i know to many people listening to this it gets confusing. medicare is the program for seniors 40 to *f million to 45 million depend. we talk about how the cuts from medicare are going to be used to pay for this bill. but we've not talked as much about medicaid, which is an even larger government program. 60 million people depend on medicaid. they're low-income people -- in order to be able to qualify for the program. and this bill would add 15 million more americans to the medicaid program, which as senator corker said, is like giving someone a bus ticket to a

mr. alexander: i would say to the senator from texas, i think he's exactly right. there's a lot of very appealing talk that we hear from the advocates of the so-called health reform bill. but when we get right down to it and we examine it chosely, we find basically a big increase in government-run programs, and what does that mean for low-income americans and what does it mean for seniors who depend upon our biggest government-run programs, that's medicare and medicaid? the risk that they may not have access to the doctor they want. the senator from wyoming mentioned on the floor of the mentioned on the floor of the >> by many on the other side as an example of controlling costs is beginning to say we cannot take patients from a government run programs. in some cases, because we are not reimbursed properly. what will happen in the, behind all of this heavy talk we're hearing with health care, we will find more and more low-income patients don't into a program called medicaid where half of the doctors won't see a new medicaid patients by giving is some when a bus ti

mr. alexander: and i'll just read one sentence from it. "that expend spanning the current medicare system to persons of 5 to 64 years old would ultimately hurt patients by accelerating the financial ruin of hospitals and doctors across this country." so, i'm very puzzled ideas like this are being cooked up behind closed doors two weeks before christmas and we don't know what they are. and the suggestion is that we don't vote today and go home this weekend. mr. mccain: not only is there questions that need to be -- not only is the oppose significance from the mayo clinic but the american medical association and the american hospital association have come out steadfastly against. i quote from this editorial. here we are going out for the weekend, and the editorial for "the washington post" says, "presumably, the expanded medicare program would pay medicare rates to providers, medicare rates to providers, "washington post" says presumably the expanded medicare program would pay medicare rates to providers, raising the question of the spillove

mr. reed of nevada, aye. senators voting in the negative. alexander, bohmbach, chambliss, coburn, corker, corn then, demeant, ensign, graham, grassley. hatch, hutchinson. inhofe, kyle, lemieux, lugar, mccain, connor, rich, roberts, sessions, voinovich and wicker. >> mr. byrd, aye. mr. webb, aye. mr. vitter, no. mr. baucus, aye. >> mr. kerry. mr. kerry, aye. mr. schumer, mr. schumer, aye. mr. kaufman, aye. mr. shelby, no. mr. bennett of utah, no. >> mr. lincoln. mrs. lincoln, aye. ms. landreaux. ms. landreaux, aye. >> on this vote, the yeas are 63, and the nay are 55. the motion is agreed. the question is on the motion to concur with the house amendment. sufficient second? there appears to be a sufficient second. clerk will call the roll. [roll call] [roll call] [roll call] mr. reid: madam president? the presiding officer: mr. leader. mr. reid: may we have order, mr. reid: may we have order, >> leader, may we have order, please the presiding officer: anyone wish to change their vote or hasn't voted? by a vote of 88 ayes and 10 noes, the motion to concu

mrs. richardson recording the entry at 15th and alexander where only i.d.s are checked and weapons are not checked until the east wing. maybe weapons should be checked before they get that close to the white house. is that correct? >> for a state dinner, that is our procedure. for other types of event, it will happen further off site. it is inexcusable that these people were let through. but depending on the type of event is, we'll drive where we are going to do our screening. one other thing, i'm a former prosecutor. over the years, i have observed that we expect su superior enforcement from our law enforcement and then don't give them adequate resources. i want you to know i'm sensitive to this. it's our committee's responsibility and oversite to make sure the security service has the resources they need to do a superior job. i am disappointed that this couple did not appear today. i am thinking perhaps they were on the invited guest list. thank you, i yield back. >> thank you. i think the record can affirm in every instance, we always ask whether or not he has the resources to do his jo

mrs. richardson made regarding the entry at 15th and alexander hamilton were only id is checked and weaponsre not checked and so there at the east wing. i wonder if that is of the new consider its vulnerability and they should be checked before they get that close to the white house. is that procedure correct? >> for a state dinner that is our procedure. for other events it will happen further offside. again, it is inexcusable that these people were led through. they never should have been let through with their name not being i checked this. depending on what the type of event is that will derive where we are doing screening. >> thank you. i am a former prosecutor. over the years, i have observed that we expect superior enforcement from our law enforcement and yet we do not give them the resources they need. i am not putting you on the spot to ask you if you feel like to have adequate resources, but i am sensitive to that. it is also our committee's response ability with oversight to make sure they have the resources they need to do the superior job that we expect of them. i think you agai

alexander hamilton, for example, the first secretary of the treasury, is said to have said "a national debt, if it is not excessive, will be to us a national blessing." end of quote. mr. jefferson, who didn't always follow his advice to others, said, "never spend your money before you have it." now, i've often thought too that what we have here tonight is a discussion about how people's thoughts, ideas, opinions, reactions, to the news events of the day are affected by the 24-hour, seven-day-a-week coverage of that subject by the media. well, tonight we're here to find out. we have a panel moderated by bob franken. he is an emmy award-winning journalist, syndicated columnist and tv political analyst. he served previously as a correspondent for cnn and msnbc. bob franken, who -- whom i've known for a number of years, was recently inducted into the society for professional journalists in washington's hall of fame. our second panelist is margaret brennan, an anchor and reporter for bloomberg television news in new york. previously she was a contributor to cnbc and nightly news as well as msnbc. she is also a graduate of mr. jefferson's university of virginia. alan murra

alexander hamilton, for example, the first secretary of the treasury, is said to have said, "the national debt, if it is not excessive, will be to was a national blessing." mr. jefferson did not always follow his advice to others and said, "never spend your money before you have it." i have often fought, too, is that what we have tonight is a discussion about how people's thoughts, ideas, and opinions and reactions to the news events of the days are affected by the 24-hour, seven days a week coverage. tonight we are here to find out. we have a panel moderated by of franklin, and in the award winning journalist -- by bob franken. he is third with cnbc. bob franken, whom i have known from the years, was recently inducted into the society for professional journalists and washington's hall of fame. our second panelists is margaret brennan, an anger and reporter from bloomberg television news in new york. previously, she was a general assignment reporter for cnbc and a contributor to nbc's today's issue -- today show and nightly news. she is also a graduate of mr. jefferson's university of virginia. [inaudible] [laughter] alan murray is the executive editor onli

alexander hamilton for example, the first secretary of the treasury, is said to have said, quote, a national debt, if it is not excessive, will lead to a national blessing. mr didn't always follow his advice to others, said, quote, never spend your money before you have it. i have often thought too that what we have here tonight is a discussion about how people's fox, ideas, opinions and reactions to the news events of the day are affected by the 24 hour, seven day a week coverage of that subject by the media. tonight we are here to find out. we have a panel moderated by bob franken, an emmy award winning journalist, syndicated columnist and political analyst. he served as a correspondent for cnn and ms nbc. bob franken who i have known for a number of years was recently inducted into the society for professional journalists in washington's hall of fame. our second panelist is margaret brennan, and anchor and reporter for bloomberg television news in new york. she was a general assignment reporter for nbc and a contributor to nbc's today show and nightly news as well as an best nbc. she is also a graduate of mr. jefferson's university of virginia. alan murr