Medicare Data Access for Transparency and Accountability Act

Mr. President, today, along with my colleagues Senators Sessions, McCaskill, Thune, Boxer, and Graham, I am introducing the Crime Victim Restitution and Court Fee Intercept Act. This bipartisan bill would help crime victims and state courts recover the restitution and fees that are owed to them. This bill would accomplish this worthy goal by intercepting tax refunds of deadbeat debtors who've failed to pay restitution or court fees. If enacted, this bill would essentially allow state courts to cross-reference outstanding debts with the IRS and use existing procedures to withhold tax refunds in order to satisfy past due debts.

This bill would not only deliver justice to crime victims who are owed restitution, but would also provide much-needed resources to help keep court rooms open and court programs operating. At a time when our State and local governments are struggling to find funding for vital programs--including keeping courthouse doors open--unpaid court fees represent an important source of revenue that should be captured. This bill would help close budget gaps and provide additional revenue without raising taxes or imposing any new costs or burdens. In fact, participation in the program would be optional for States, but I expect most States to participate and to benefit greatly from this bill.

This bill would operate the same way as the very successful child support debt collection system. The bill will allow states to share information on outstanding restitution owed and court debts with the IRS, which would then be required to intercept any Federal tax refunds of debtors and send that money to the victim or court owed that debt.

It has been estimated by the National Center for State Courts that outstanding court debts across the country total approximately $15 billion. In my home state of Oregon alone, the outstanding restitution and court fee debt amount is $987 million. Only a portion of outstanding debts are owed by individuals who will receive Federal tax refunds, so a portion of court debts would not be collected immediately. Nonetheless, the state of Oregon estimates that passage of this bill would allow the State to collect $30 million per year.

Without this straight-forward and efficient mechanism, the collection of victim restitution and court debts is a costly and time-consuming process. Enactment of this bill would reduce the fiscal cost and administrative burden that victims and courts bear in attempting to collect those debts. Again, in the midst of a challenging fiscal crisis, it only makes common sense to collect revenues that are already owed--through an efficient and convenient method.

Because this bill would benefit both the court system, and those who rely upon it, the Crime Victim Restitution and Court Fee Intercept Act is endorsed by a broad array of court, government, law enforcement, and crime victims' organizations. I would like to especially recognize the National Center for State Courts and the American Bar Association for their support in getting this bill introduced.

The bill is also supported by the Conference of Chief Justices, the Conference of State Court Administrators, the National Association for Court Managers, the National Conference of State Legislatures, the National Association of Counties, the Government Finance Officers Association, the National District Attorneys Association, the American Probation and Parole Association, the National Crime Law Institute, the National Center for Victims of Crime, the National Organization for Victim Assistance, the National Association of Crime Victim Compensation Boards, the National Association of VOCA Assistance Administrators, the National Network to End Domestic Violence, the National Alliance to End Sexual Violence, the National Organization of Parents of Murdered Children Inc., and Mothers Against Drunk Driving.

I urge all colleagues to support this bipartisan legislation and I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise today with Senator Grassley to introduce the Medicare Data Access for Transparency and Accountability Act. I would like to begin by thanking my friend and esteemed colleague for his unwavering commitment to greater transparency and accountability in government. This Medicare DATA Act advances that goal.

Sunshine continues to be the greatest disinfectant. In that light, the Medicare DATA Act ensures all taxpayers have access to the Medicare Claims Database, both to aid them in making medical decisions, and in understanding what their money is paying for in this vital, yet enormous, health program. Making this information public will also help prevent wasteful spending and outright fraud in Medicare claims. The Medicare Claims Database is an important resource for public and private stakeholders as it captures healthcare provider payment and claims information for roughly 1/3 of the United States healthcare system. But why isn't this information already available?

In 1978, the Department of Health Education and Welfare attempted to release this information, upon request, under the premise that accessibility to the source data was in the public interest and therefore should be made available for public consumption. An injunction by a Florida court, however, successfully blocked that public disclosure of this information. As a result, this data has been--with limited exceptions made for government employees, contractors, and researchers willing to pay for partial access--off limits for the last three decades. Passage of the Medicare DATA Act puts an end to that practice.

I consider hiding information affecting the American taxpayer that clearly should be in the public domain, to be indefensible in a free society. With this principle in mind, I join with Senator Grassley in changing ``business as usual.''

I urge my colleagues to support this legislation so that Medicare data is finally fully transparent and available to Medicare beneficiaries and taxpayers alike. I look forward to working with my colleagues in this effort.

Mr. President, part of my job as a Senator from a beautiful State like Oregon is to keep that beauty protected for the next generation of Oregonians. Today it is my pleasure to reintroduce three bills to better protect three of Oregon's special natural resources, S. 764, 765, and 766. I have introduced all of these bills before, one of these in both of the last two Congresses. The Oregon Caves Revitalization Act of 2011 was first introduced in 2008, and again in the last Congress. It progressed out of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee in the last Congress but unfortunately there wasn't an opportunity to vote on it on the Senate Floor. The Devil's Staircase Wilderness Act of 2011 also moved out of the Committee but failed to get a vote in the full Senate. The Chetco River Protection Act of 2011 was also introduced last session, but there was not enough time to get a hearing before the Senate adjourned. I am pleased to again introduce these bills with my colleague from Oregon, Senator Merkley. My colleague in the House of Representatives, Representative DeFazio, will also be introducing companion legislation today.

The first bill I am introducing, the Oregon Caves Revitalization Act of 2011, will expand the boundary of the National Park Service land to create the Oregon Caves National Monument and Preserve. Under this bill, the stunning majesty of both the underground and the aboveground treasures found at this National Monument site will be protected for future generations.

Established by a Presidential Proclamation in 1909, the Oregon Caves National Monument is a 480-acre natural wonder located in the botanically-rich Siskiyou Mountains. It was originally set aside because of its unusual scientific interest and importance. Oregon Caves has a unique geologic history and is particularly known as the longest marble cave open to the public west of the Continental Divide.

A perennial stream, the ``River Styx''--an underground portion of Cave Creek--flows through part of the cave and is one of the dynamic natural forces at work in the National Monument. The cave ecosystem provides habitat for numerous plants and animals, including some state- sensitive species such as Townsend's big-eared

bats and several cave-adapted species of arthropods found only in only one place on Earth: the Oregon Caves. The caves possess a significant collection of Pleistocene aged fossils, including jaguar and grizzly bear. In 1995, grizzly bear bones found in the cave were estimated to be at least 50,000 years old, the oldest known from either North or South America.

Today, I am proposing legislation that will enhance the protection for treasures such as these found within the Oregon Caves National Monument and that will increase public recreation opportunities by adding surrounding lands to the National Park Service site. My bill would expand the park site by 4,070 acres to include the entire Cave Creek Watershed, and transfer management of the land from the United States Forest Service to the National Park Service. The newly acquired lands will be designated as a Preserve so that hunters can still use them. In addition, my legislation would designate at least 9.6 miles of rivers and tributaries as Wild, Scenic, or Recreational, under the federal Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, including the first subterranean Wild and Scenic River, the River Styx. This bill would also authorize the retirement of existing grazing allotments.

When the Oregon Caves National Monument was established in 1909, the focus was on the unique subsurface resources, and the small rectangular boundary was thought to be adequate to protect the cave. Through the years, however, scientific research and technology have provided new information about the cave's ecology, and the impacts from the surface environment and the related hydrological processes. The current 480- acre boundary simply can't adequately protect this cave system. The National Park Service has formally proposed a boundary modification numerous times, first in 1939, again in 1949, and most recently in 2000. Today, I am happy to again propose legislation to enact that boundary adjustment into law.

The Oregon Caves National Monument makes a unique contribution to Southern Oregon's economy and to the national heritage. The Monument receives over 80,000 visitors annually and a larger Monument boundary will help showcase more fully the recreational opportunities on the above-ground lands within the proposed Monument boundary. The Monument's above-ground lands in the Siskiyou Mountains possess a beauty and diversity that is unique in America, and indeed the world. The Oregon Caves National Monument's approximately 500 plants, 5,000 animals, 2,000 fungi, and over a million bacteria per acre that make the spot have one of the highest concentrations of biological diversity anywhere.

Expanding the Monument's boundary will also preserve the caves' resources by protecting the water that enters the cave. By granting the National Park Service the ability to safeguard these resources, and by providing for a voluntary donation of grazing permits, my legislation will be able to better protect these resources. Over the decades, the number of allowed livestock has diminished, but the livestock still has an impact on the drinking water supply and the water quality of this natural gem. The current grazing permitee, Phil Krouse's family, has had the Big Grayback Grazing Allotment, 19,703 acre, since 1937. Mr. Krouse has publicly stated that he would look favorably upon retirement with private compensation for his allotment, which my legislation will allow to proceed.

The second bill I am introducing is the Devil's Staircase Wilderness Act of 2011, which designates approximately 30,540 acres surrounding the Wasson Creek area as Wilderness. Devil's Staircase personifies what Wilderness in Oregon is all about. It is rugged, wild, pristine and remote. So rugged, in fact, that land managers have repeatedly withdrawn this landslide-prone forest from all timbering activity and intrepid hikers must follow elk and deer trails and keep a sharp eye on a compass. The proposed Devil's Staircase Wilderness is the finest old- growth forest remaining in Oregon's Coast Range, boasting huge Douglas- fir, cedar and hemlock and a wealth of threatened and endangered species. Wildlife include threatened marbled murrelets and the highest density of Northern Spotted Owls in the coastal mountains.

My proposal would not only protect the forests surrounding Wasson Creek but would also designate approximately 4.5 miles of Franklin Creek and approximately 10.1 miles of Wasson Creek as Wild and Scenic Rivers. Franklin Creek, a critically important tributary to the Umpqua River, is one of the best examples of pristine salmon habitat left in Oregon. Together with Wasson Creek, these two streams in the Devil's Staircase area deserve Wild and Scenic River designation by Congress.

The ecological significance of this treasure is apparent. The land is protected as a Late-Successional Reserve by the Northwest Forest Plan, as critical habitat for the northern spotted owl, and as an Area of Critical Environmental Concern by the Bureau of Land Management. Preserving these majestic forests as Wilderness for their wildlife and spectacular scenery matches the goals of the existing land management plans. I look forward to protecting this gem for future generations.

For over a decade, I've advocated for protections for the Chetco and other threatened waterways in Southwest Oregon. I'm reintroducing a third piece of legislation today that would continue that effort. The Chetco River Protection Act of 2011 would withdraw about three miles of the Chetco River from mineral entry, while upgrading the designations for some portions.

This river is under immediate threat from out-of-state suction dredge miners. The group American Rivers said last year that the Chetco was the seventh most endangered river in the country because of those threats. This is a river that is hugely important for salmon habitat and local sport fishing. The passage of this legislation would mean protecting that habitat, and promoting the continued success of the fishing industry throughout the West Coast.

Withdrawing these portions of the river from future mineral entry will prevent future harmful mining claims and make sure that those claims that already exist are valid I am pleased the Obama administration has taken some steps to protect this area, but the passage of this legislation is needed to ensure long-term protection for this important river.

Finally, I want to express my thanks to the conservation, recreation and business communities of Southern and Coastal Oregon, and Phil Krouse for his strong conservation ethic. All of them have worked diligently to protect these special places. I look forward to working with Senator Merkley, Representative DeFazio, and other colleagues and the bill's other supporters to keep up the fight for these unique places in Oregon and get these pieces of legislation to the President's desk for his signature.

Mr. President. I rise today to introduce two bills that would lay a strong foundation to improve the Federal acquisition system.

The first bill, the Acquisition Workforce Improvement Act of 2011, S. 761, co-sponsored by Senators Akaka and McCaskill, would create a Federal acquisition management fellows program to develop a new generation of acquisition leaders with government-wide perspective, skills, and experience.

The second bill, the Federal Acquisition Institute Improvement Act of 2011, S. 762, co-sponsored by Senators Akaka, McCaskill and Brown of Massachusetts, would provide much-needed organizational clarity to enable the Federal Acquisition Institute (FAI) to fulfill its mission of facilitating career development and better management of the federal acquisition workforce.

The Federal acquisition system is under tremendous stress. Between fiscal years 2000 and 2010, acquisition spending by the federal government expanded by 163 percent, from $205 billion to $535 billion. The necessary costs of military operations, natural disasters, homeland security precautions, and other vital programs will continue to strain the acquisition system in the years ahead.

This unprecedented level of purchasing creates abundant opportunities for fraud, waste, and abuse. We have seen far too many outrageous failures in government contracting. The Secure Border Initiative Network, the Census Bureau's handheld computers for the 2010 Census, and the Marine Presidential Helicopter programs are among recent, notorious and costly acquisition failures, which we can ill afford.

These and other failures demand strong steps to protect taxpayer dollars and deliver better acquisition outcomes.

As a long-time advocate for stronger competition, accountability, and transparency in government contracting, I recognize the actions the Administration has taken recently to improve federal contracting. Many of these initiatives originated from legislation I co-authored with Senator Lieberman during the 110th Congress.

But, no matter how many laws we pass or guidance documents OMB issues, the effectiveness of our Federal acquisition system ultimately depends on a vital human component--the acquisition workforce.

While contract spending has risen dramatically, the number of acquisition professionals who help plan, award, and oversee these contracts has been stagnant. And with roughly half of the current acquisition workforce eligible to retire by 2018, the difficulties of strengthening that workforce are becoming increasingly acute. A well- trained and adequately sized acquisition workforce is critical to managing and overseeing federal spending and the increasingly complex procurements of services and goods.

The two pieces of legislation I am introducing today are designed to address these important long-term goals.

The Acquisition Workforce Improvement Act would create a centrally managed, Government-wide Acquisition Management Fellows Program that combines both a Master's degree-level academic curriculum and on-the- job training in multiple federal agencies. By partnering with leading universities that have specialized government acquisition programs, the government can attract top-caliber students and retain our best government employees who are interested in pursuing both academic advancement and public service.

Compared to the several existing, agency-specific intern programs, this government-wide program would provide a much-needed skill set that we currently do not have in sufficient number; that is, acquisition professionals with multi-agency and multi-disciplinary training who can understand and manage government-wide acquisition needs and perspectives.

Considering that interagency acquisition now accounts for approximately 40 percent of the Federal Government's entire contract spending, and that GAO has designated the management of interagency contracting a high-risk area since 2005, it is evident that we need to develop future acquisition leaders who understand government-wide needs and perspectives and are able to operate effectively outside of the traditional, single-agency environment.

Specifically, the Acquisition Management Fellows Program would include one academic year of full-time, on-campus training followed by 2 years of on-the-job and part-time training toward a Masters or equivalent graduate degree in related fields; and a curriculum that would include rotational assignments at three or more executive agencies covering, among other issues, acquisition planning, cost- estimating, formation and post-award administration of ``high risk'' contract types, and interagency contracts.

Upon graduation, participants will have completed all required, non- agency-specific training courses necessary for a basic contracting officer warrant.

In addition, participants would be required to enter into a service commitment to ensure the Federal Government receives a proper return on its investment. The service commitment would be no less than 1 year for each year a participant is in the program, and would require reimbursement of funds for those who do not successfully complete the program or do not fulfill the minimum service requirements.

Our second bill, the Federal Acquisition Institute Improvement Act, would strengthen the Federal Acquisition Institute, FAI, whose key responsibilities are to promote career development and strategic human capital management for the entire civilian acquisition workforce.

The FAI has remained largely underutilized due to a lack of organizational clarity, the disproportionate funding compared to its counterpart in the Department of Defense, and its intermittent use by a few Federal agencies.

The proposed legislation would establish a clear line of responsibility and accountability for the Institute by requiring that FAI, through its Board of Directors, report directly to the Office of Federal Procurement Policy, OFPP; the director of FAI be appointed by the OFPP Administrator, and report directly to the OFPP Associate Administrator for Acquisition Workforce; all existing civilian agency training programs follow guidelines issued by OFPP, which would ensure consistent training standards necessary to develop uniform core competencies; and the OFPP Administrator report annually to Congressional committees of jurisdiction projected FAI budget needs and expense plans to fulfill its statutory mandate.

With respect to its core government-wide functions, FAI would be required to provide and keep current government-wide training standards and certification requirements including ensuring effective agency implementation of government-wide training and certification standards; analyzing the curriculum to ascertain if all certification competencies are covered, or if adjustments are necessary; developing career-path information for certified professionals to encourage retention in government positions; and coordinating with the Office of Personnel Management for human capital efforts.

The administration has identified acquisition workforce development as a pillar for improving acquisition practices and contract performance. While I fully agree with this goal, we need specific and concrete action to solve this problem.

Our legislation would prompt the sustained effort necessary to rebuild the acquisition workforce. While this will take time and investment, I am confident this is a wise investment that will yield substantial returns. Just think about it: if our better-trained acquisition professionals can prevent one failed procurement, it can save the taxpayer hundreds of millions of dollars. If they can avoid overpaying one percent of our contract spending, it

will save the taxpayer more than five billion dollars each year. The numbers speak for themselves.

The Acquisition Workforce Improvement Act and the Federal Acquisition Institute Improvement Act are critically needed and both enjoy bipartisan support. I encourage my colleagues to support them.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Securing Teacher Effectiveness, Leaders, Learning, And Results Act of 2011--the STELLAR Student Act, and I am honored to be joined in this bipartisan effort by my colleagues Senator Scott Brown and Senator Mary Landrieu. The STELLAR Student Act will ensure that all students are taught by effective teachers and that all teachers are supported by effective principals.

Teacher and principal effectiveness are critical factors in improving student learning and achievement. Research shows that increasing teacher quality is one of the most effective and promising strategies for improving education in the United States. Some studies show that the differences in achievement gains for students who had the most effective teachers versus those who had the least effective teachers were greater than any single influence of class-size, race, socio- economic status, or parent education. Estimates suggest that the difference between having a highly effective teacher versus a highly ineffective teacher can be as much as a full year's learning growth.

Imagine the dire situation for a student who has a highly ineffective teacher for multiple years in a row. It is a situation that many students experience and potentially never recover from. There are far too many ineffective teachers, especially in less affluent urban districts. In many cases, due to antiquated hiring and firing protocols and policies, those ineffective teachers are keeping innovative young teachers from teaching where they are needed most. It is essential that we begin to differentiate between those highly effective and highly ineffective teachers and principals, especially when it comes to making personnel decisions in these challenging economic times.

The STELLAR Student Act of 2011 aims to encourage States to do just that by directing States to develop evaluation systems that consider student achievement and classroom observation, and to use those evaluations for key personnel decisions including pay, tenure, lay- offs, and retention.

To further these goals, the STELLAR Student Act of 2011 would specifically direct States to implement a teacher assessment system that bases teacher effectiveness predominantly on student academic growth and other measures including classroom observations; direct States to implement a principal assessment system that bases effectiveness predominantly on student academic growth as well as improvement in graduation rates, leadership, and successful hiring, development, evaluation, and retention of teachers; tie Title 1 funding to teacher and principal evaluations that incorporate multiple measures, relying predominantly on measures of student academic growth and achievement, as well as classroom performance; require that evaluations be used to inform key personnel decisions including tenure, compensation, and layoffs in the event of any reduction in force; encourage input from teachers and principals in the development and improvement of evaluations; and encourage improved targeting of professional development based on these evaluations.

The STELLAR Student Act addresses the fact that current teacher and principal evaluation systems are inadequate. Evaluation measures for teachers are not strongly linked to their ability to teach. In fact, seniority, not effectiveness, is often the single indicator used for making teacher personnel decisions. Some studies show that less than 1 percent of teachers are identified as unsatisfactory even though we know many more than 1 percent falls into this category. This also means that our most effective teachers are lumped together with less effective teachers and are not recognized for their exceptional work.

It is time to rethink conventional measures of teacher qualifications such as advanced degrees, traditional

credentialing, and years of experience as measures of teacher quality, and focus instead on actual measures of teacher effectiveness, such as student academic growth. Indeed, many States are looking for ways to tie teacher performance to student achievement and then use this information to inform personnel decisions. The STELLAR Student Act will help States do just that.

Although we believe it is important to hold teachers and principals accountable for student achievement, teachers and principals are certainly not the problem--they are an essential part of the solution. This bill asks for input from teachers and principals in designing and improving assessment systems, recognizes the importance of observation and other ongoing formative assessments, highlights the need for meaningful professional development, and asks States to duly recognize those effective teachers and leaders. The STELLAR Student Act also encourages school districts to assist low performing teachers by setting up targeted remediation and improvement plans.

Many teachers and parents also recognize and support the need for effective teacher evaluation linked to student performance. In a recent survey, 69 percent of teachers and 92 percent of parents support measuring teacher effectiveness based on student growth. In addition, most teachers--approximately 80 percent--and parents--approximately 96 percent--also believe that giving schools more ability to remove teachers who are not serving students well should be another priority. From the same survey, teachers in schools with high proportions of low- income students, high proportions of minority students, and those in urban or rural schools are more likely than other teachers to say that using measurements of teacher effectiveness that are based in significant part on student growth is something that must be done. Those same teachers are also more likely to say that giving schools greater ability to remove teachers who are not serving students well is something that must be done.

The Administration and many States are already moving in the direction of increased accountability and effective teacher and principal assessments. As the President said in the State of the Union ``we do want to reward good teachers and stop making excuses for the bad ones.'' A number of States, many of which are leaders in education reform, are exploring ways to hold teachers and principals more accountable along with rethinking ideas around tenure and the long standing last-in-first-out policies.

Whether your concern is that our students rank behind 30 other countries in math, that 1.2 million students drop out of school each year, or that an unacceptable achievement gap still persists for our low income and minority students, all of us must act on the urgent need to put forth a strong bipartisan effort to fix our education system. The reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, long overdue, affords us the opportunity. We must work across the aisle to fix what is broken in the current education law. We hope the STELLAR Student Act will be considered in the context of the ESEA rewrite, to ensure effective teachers and principals for every child and every school. Our colleagues in the House have introduced a similar bill, and I urge my colleagues in the Senate to support the STELLAR Student Act of 2011.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, in March, I introduced S. 454, the Strengthening Program Integrity and Accountability in Health Care Act, to enhance the government's ability to combat Medicare and Medicaid fraud.

One of the provisions in that bill would require the Secretary of Health and Human Services to issue regulations to make Medicare claims and payment data available to the public similar to other federal spending disclosed on www.USAspending.gov.

That website was created by legislation sponsored by then-Senator Obama and Senator Coburn. It lists almost all federal spending, but it doesn't include Medicare payments made to physicians.

That means virtually every other government program, including some defense spending, is more transparent than spending by the Medicare program.

Medicare is funded by taxpayers, and in 2009, the federal government spent $502 billion on Medicare.

Taxpayers should have a right to see how their hard-earned dollars are being spent.

Also, if doctors know their billing information is public, it might deter some wasteful practices and overbilling.

On the day that I introduced S. 454, I learned that Senator Wyden was also working on legislation to make Medicare payments to physicians available to the public. We decided to work together.

Today, Senator Wyden and I are introducing the Medicare Data Access for Transparency and Accountability Act, Medicare DATA Act.

This bill would require the Secretary of Health and Human Services to issue regulations to make available a searchable Medicare payment database that the public can access at no cost.

Our bill also clarifies that data on Medicare payments to physicians and suppliers do not fall under a Freedom of Information Act, FOIA, exemption.

Under a 1979 court decision, Medicare is prohibited from releasing physicians' billing information to the public.

But before that injunction, the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare--now the Department of Health and Human Services--was in the process of releasing reimbursement data for all Medicare providers.

Third parties that have tried to obtain physician specific data through the FOIA process have failed in the past because the courts held that physicians' privacy interests outweigh the public's interest in disclosure.

The nonprofit, consumer organization--Consumers' Checkbook--for example, had filed a lawsuit against the Department of Health and Human Services to compel disclosure of that data.

The organization made its FOIA request to determine whether or not Medicare paid physicians who had the qualifications to perform the services for which they sought federal reimbursement, especially those performing a high volume of difficult procedures.

In particular, the organization was looking for physicians with insufficient board certifications or histories of disciplinary actions.

My question is: why wouldn't we want individuals examining this data to ensure that the government is protecting taxpayer dollars by preventing improper billing to the Medicare program?

And why wouldn't we want public interest watchdog groups helping to look out for potential abuse or fraud?

In January, the Wall Street Journal reported the American Medical Association's, AMA, concerns about making

Medicare claims data publicly available.

The AMA President said that physicians ``should not suffer the consequences of having false or misleading conclusions drawn from complex Medicare data that has significant limitations.''

But I would like to note the value of access to Medicare billing data.

Even with limited access, the Wall Street Journal was able to identify suspicious billing patterns and potential abuses of the Medicare system.

The Wall Street Journal found cases where Medicare paid millions to a physician, sometimes for several years, before those questionable payments stopped.

Volume alone doesn't automatically mean there's fraud, waste, or abuse.

More patients may be going to a specific physician for a particular service because that physician is a leader in his or her field.

Nonetheless, to alleviate the concerns raised by the American Medical Association, our bill would require a disclaimer that the data in the public database ``does not reflect on the quality of the items of services furnished or of the provider of services or supplier who furnished the items or services.''

I believe transparency in the health care system leads to more accountability and thus less waste and more efficient use of scarce resources.

I have often quoted Justice Brandeis, who said, ``Sunlight is the best disinfectant.''

That is what Senator Wyden and I are aiming to accomplish with the Medicare DATA Act.

When it comes to public programs like Medicare, the Federal Government needs all the help it can get to identify and combat fraud, waste and abuse.

Our bill will add to the reforms Congress passed last year.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, in March, I introduced S. 454, the Strengthening Program Integrity and Accountability in Health Care Act, to enhance the government's ability to combat Medicare and Medicaid fraud.

One of the provisions in that bill would require the Secretary of Health and Human Services to issue regulations to make Medicare claims and payment data available to the public similar to other federal spending disclosed on www.USAspending.gov.

That website was created by legislation sponsored by then-Senator Obama and Senator Coburn. It lists almost all federal spending, but it doesn't include Medicare payments made to physicians.

That means virtually every other government program, including some defense spending, is more transparent than spending by the Medicare program.

Medicare is funded by taxpayers, and in 2009, the federal government spent $502 billion on Medicare.

Taxpayers should have a right to see how their hard-earned dollars are being spent.

Also, if doctors know their billing information is public, it might deter some wasteful practices and overbilling.

On the day that I introduced S. 454, I learned that Senator Wyden was also working on legislation to make Medicare payments to physicians available to the public. We decided to work together.

Today, Senator Wyden and I are introducing the Medicare Data Access for Transparency and Accountability Act, Medicare DATA Act.

This bill would require the Secretary of Health and Human Services to issue regulations to make available a searchable Medicare payment database that the public can access at no cost.

Our bill also clarifies that data on Medicare payments to physicians and suppliers do not fall under a Freedom of Information Act, FOIA, exemption.

Under a 1979 court decision, Medicare is prohibited from releasing physicians' billing information to the public.

But before that injunction, the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare--now the Department of Health and Human Services--was in the process of releasing reimbursement data for all Medicare providers.

Third parties that have tried to obtain physician specific data through the FOIA process have failed in the past because the courts held that physicians' privacy interests outweigh the public's interest in disclosure.

The nonprofit, consumer organization--Consumers' Checkbook--for example, had filed a lawsuit against the Department of Health and Human Services to compel disclosure of that data.

The organization made its FOIA request to determine whether or not Medicare paid physicians who had the qualifications to perform the services for which they sought federal reimbursement, especially those performing a high volume of difficult procedures.

In particular, the organization was looking for physicians with insufficient board certifications or histories of disciplinary actions.

My question is: why wouldn't we want individuals examining this data to ensure that the government is protecting taxpayer dollars by preventing improper billing to the Medicare program?

And why wouldn't we want public interest watchdog groups helping to look out for potential abuse or fraud?

In January, the Wall Street Journal reported the American Medical Association's, AMA, concerns about making

Medicare claims data publicly available.

The AMA President said that physicians ``should not suffer the consequences of having false or misleading conclusions drawn from complex Medicare data that has significant limitations.''

But I would like to note the value of access to Medicare billing data.

Even with limited access, the Wall Street Journal was able to identify suspicious billing patterns and potential abuses of the Medicare system.

The Wall Street Journal found cases where Medicare paid millions to a physician, sometimes for several years, before those questionable payments stopped.

Volume alone doesn't automatically mean there's fraud, waste, or abuse.

More patients may be going to a specific physician for a particular service because that physician is a leader in his or her field.

Nonetheless, to alleviate the concerns raised by the American Medical Association, our bill would require a disclaimer that the data in the public database ``does not reflect on the quality of the items of services furnished or of the provider of services or supplier who furnished the items or services.''

I believe transparency in the health care system leads to more accountability and thus less waste and more efficient use of scarce resources.

I have often quoted Justice Brandeis, who said, ``Sunlight is the best disinfectant.''

That is what Senator Wyden and I are aiming to accomplish with the Medicare DATA Act.

When it comes to public programs like Medicare, the Federal Government needs all the help it can get to identify and combat fraud, waste and abuse.

Our bill will add to the reforms Congress passed last year.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.