Benjamin L. Cardin

Mr. President, in a moment, I am going to be making a unanimous consent request. I am going to wait for Senator Grassley to be on the floor.

Let me just, if I might, explain what the unanimous consent will be. It deals with H.R. 766. I am a proud sponsor of the Preventive Health Savings Act since the 113th Congress as it stands. The Congressional Budget Office scores budgetary implications of preventive health legislation in a 10-year timeframe, limiting Congress's ability to understand the long-term impacts of meaningful prevention policies.

This bicameral, bipartisan legislation would direct CBO to more accurately reflect the long-term cost saving potential of preventive healthcare initiatives and encourage the use of data-informed preventive health measures.

On March 19 of this year, the House of Representatives passed this legislation by voice vote.

Now, here is the challenge we have. This legislation will allow us to implement preventive healthcare sooner. That will save lives and will save dollars. To just give you one example, we now have a multicancer blood screening test that could be implemented for certain targeted populations.

The longer that is delayed--and being reimbursable under our healthcare system--the more people are not going to have the advantage of that, and more lives are going to be lost. And later detection of cancer, we know, is a more costly type of care that is needed, and it costs more money.

So we have a chance today, because this is a House-passed bill, to send this bill to the President, and that is why I will be making a unanimous consent request in regards to the bill.

I know that Senator Grassley has other legislation that he has been trying to get attached. I will urge him not to do that because it will, obviously, mean this bill will not pass. His issue is not related to the issue that this bill is about.

I want to thank Senator Whitehouse and Senator Grassley for their help on the Budget Committee itself. But this is our last opportunity to do something meaningful to implement preventive healthcare that will save lives and actually save dollars for the taxpayers of this country. There is no question about it. This bill saves money, and we can get it done now.

Any amendment on it, obviously, would have to go back to the House, and there is no possibility that the House would agree to it.

Mr. President, as if in legislative session, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of H.R. 766, which was received from the House and is at the desk; further, that the bill be considered read a third time and passed; and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mr. President, reserving the right to object, if I might--and, again, I appreciate Senator Grassley's comments about this Senator. I feel the same about Senator Grassley. He has been an incredible voice in the U.S. Senate, particularly on transparency, particularly against waste, and has taken on some of the most challenging battles here on the floor of the U.S. Senate.

I have worked on this legislation now for several Congresses. My partners are Senator Crapo, Senator Cramer, Senator King. We have all worked on this bill together.

And the bill is very simple. It just allows a more realistic budget window for preventive healthcare. And it is something that we have been talking about for a long time so that we don't get trapped with high upfront costs that have large savings, and we never get to the savings because CBO cannot score it under the current budget rules.

The challenges that Senator Grassley is raising are not in this bill. We have worked very closely with the budget people to make sure that this bill does not contain the concerns that Senator Grassley is raising.

The Senator might be raising a very legitimate concerns, but it is not this legislation that is causing it. This legislation only allows us to be able to implement in a more realistic way preventive healthcare services with legitimate cost estimates and offsets so that we can get the savings from preventive healthcare and implement preventive healthcare sooner, saving lives and dollars.

We can make progress on this issue now. The problem is twofold with the request that is being made. First, the potential abuse is not in this legislation. It deals with a broader issue. And then, secondly, if this bill is amended, I think Senator Grassley also understands the chances of passage are zero. There is no possibility that this bill can be taken up in the House at this late stage.

So this is our last opportunity. I came to the floor today and not before because I respect greatly Senator Grassley and his concerns, and I was hoping we could find a path forward for that to happen. But there is no path forward for that to happen now, and by including the request, I would be sacrificing both bills. And I would hope the Senator would recognize that and allow this modest improvement for preventive healthcare to go forward.

With that, I regretfully object.

Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Madam President, section 36(b) of the Arms Export Control Act requires that Congress receive prior notification of certain proposed arms sales as defined by that statute. Upon such notification, the Congress has 30 calendar days during which the sale may be reviewed. The provision stipulates that, in the Senate, the notification of proposed sales shall be sent to the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

In keeping with the committee's intention to see that relevant information is still available to the full Senate, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the notifications that have been received. If the cover letter references a classified annex, then such an annex is available to all Senators in the office of the Foreign Relations Committee, room SD-423.