Floor Statements

I ask unanimous consent that no further points of order be in order during the pendency of H.R. 3288.

It is my understanding that the next vote will be tomorrow morning at 9:30. We will be happy to come in at 8:30, but I ask unanimous consent if we could have that vote at 9:30. We will come in at 9, if that is OK with everybody.

I am happy to.

I think my friend from Arizona asks a very pertinent question. We offered a consent request last evening--and I did again today--that we would have the votes now before the Senate in sequential order. I offered a unanimous consent request to do that. We are happy to do that. I announced there would be no more votes today. On Monday when we come in, we will be happy to do that.

Yes, but on all amendments that we have had up to this point, every side, Democrats or Republicans, has had the opportunity to do side-by-sides if they wanted to. In the weeks we have worked on this, what has transpired here, I am quite sure, has happened before. Simply stated, we have been requested by Republicans to have some votes, and we have agreed to have the votes. I explained in some detail last evening why we can't do it on a piecemeal basis. Procedurally, it puts us into a quagmire. Let's clear the deck. There will be other amendments after that we would certainly try to have each side offer.

But I agree with the Senator from Arizona, we should get rid of the drug reimportation amendment one way or the other, in addition to the motion offered by Senator Crapo.

If I could make a comment before my friend the Republican leader comments, everyone should understand--this should make it easier for everybody--I am going to be home all weekend in Washington. I won't be traveling the country doing any fundraisers that people seem to be afraid of.

If I could have the Record reflect, the Republican leader is right. I said we would be in session the next several weekends. But if you go back and look at the Record, how many times have I said we would be in session over the weekend and, interestingly enough, around here, magic things happen on Thursdays and Fridays. I have had every intention, as I have every time I have said it, that we should be in on a weekend, and usually we are able to work something out. We haven't been able to this time. I accept that. I am not complaining. But certainly the question of my friend from Massachusetts is a pertinent one. Senators are here now. Maybe we could have the vote early. But it is set statutorily. My unanimous consent request was, and I am not sure it was responded to, that we could have that vote at 9:30 tomorrow morning without having the mandatory 1-hour beforehand.

I heard no objection to that. We will just come in at 8:30. We will come in at 8:30 tomorrow morning and have a 9:30 vote.

Mr. President, reserving the right to object, I would ask my friend from Oregon if he would allow this modification to his unanimous consent request. It would be as follows: consent that Senator Lincoln be recognized and that she be allowed to speak for up to 10 minutes; that Senator Gregg be recognized for up to 10 minutes; and then that Senators Wyden, Collins, and Bayh be permitted to engage in a colloquy for up to 30 minutes; that following the conclusion of that 30 minutes, Senator Alexander or his designee be recognized for up to 30 minutes to engage in a colloquy with other members of the Republican caucus.

If that is OK with the Senator from Arkansas.

Mr. President, following leader marks, the Senate will resume consideration of H.R. 3590, the health care reform legislation. The time until 1 p.m. today will be equally divided and controlled and will be for debate only, with the time until 11 a.m. controlled between the two leaders or their designees and the remaining time controlled in 30-minute alternating blocks. The majority will control the first block and Republicans will control the next. Senators will be permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each.

I expect the House of Representatives to send a conference report to the Senate this afternoon. When it arrives, we will consider it. If cloture needs to be invoked, the Senate will have to be in session this weekend for a Saturday vote and a Sunday vote in order to complete action on these bills. This bill includes the bills we have tried to complete. We have been held up by the minority on these bills, but we have made progress. The first will be the Transportation appropriations bill, Commerce-Justice-Science, Military Construction, Labor-HHS, financial services, and State-Foreign Operations. That would leave the only remaining bill to be the Defense appropriations bill, which we will do sometime before the end of the year. We hope we can get word from the Republicans today what they want to do. Whatever they want to do, it is in their hands.

Everyone should understand that procedurally, no one can stop us from moving to the appropriations bills. It is bipartisan. We have worked closely with Republicans on this matter. We automatically go off the health care bill when we get on this. We are waiting for the score to come back from the Congressional Budget Office. There isn't a lot we can do until we get that done, which would be next week. So no time is lost on health care. We have to complete our work for the year anyway. So we have to do this bill.

Whenever we hear from the Republicans, Senators will know what their schedules can be. We could complete our work today and come back and work something out so that we can have a Monday vote. But whatever the Republicans want, we will be happy to cooperate with them--I shouldn't say whatever they want.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, I move to proceed to the conference report to accompany H.R. 3288, and I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. President, I am happy to respond through the Chair to my distinguished colleague.

I think it is pretty evident to everyone here not only what has happened here on the Senate floor but the statements that have been made publicly and privately. And certainly I am not going to discuss any private conversations I have had, but based on Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck, which is on all the news today, they are upset at Senator McConnell because he is not opposing the health care bill enough--that in a reasonable process on this, there are no efforts being made to improve this bill, only to kill this bill.

I think the debate has come to a point that I have rarely seen in the Senate. In fact, I have never seen it. To have my friends on the other side of the aisle come to the floor and in some way try to embarrass or denigrate me by virtue of the fact that--in fact, trying to embarrass me. What they should understand is that any events I had scheduled for this weekend have been canceled. Events I had last weekend had been canceled--four or five of them. To say the least, I would never, ever intentionally come to the floor and try to talk to somebody about having had a fundraiser and that is why they are trying to get out of here.

The reason I laid out to the Senate what I thought was a reasonable schedule is because, procedurally, we are where we are. The rules of the Senate are such that once cloture is invoked, that is what you stay with. I thought it would be appropriate, because we have worked pretty hard here, to have a day or two off. Anything that was reasonable, I would be happy to deal with everyone. But there was no result from this. Everything that can be done to stall and to divert attention from this bill is being done. And that is too bad, because it is important legislation.

Today, 14,000 Americans will lose their health insurance. Between now and 3:30, a number of people will die as a result of having no health insurance. So we are engaged in some important stuff; as pundits have said, some of the most important legislation that has ever been in this body.

So I am going to proceed to follow the rules of the Senate, and I am sorry we haven't been able to work with the Republicans in a constructive fashion on this health care bill, but it is obvious we haven't.

Mr. President, I say to my friend from Kentucky that I have an event I am going to now. I will vote and come back, and I will see if we can work something out.

Mr. President, we are here at 7 o'clock. My friend--I want to make sure the Record reflects that he is my friend--the Republican leader, we scuffle and argue out here, but we have done a lot of things together over the years. But I do have a direct quote from my friend just this afternoon:

We have been anxious to have health care votes since

Tuesday and we have had the Crapo amendment pending since

Tuesday. We would like to vote on amendments. All we are

asking is an opportunity to offer amendments and get votes.

That is what we have been trying to do now for the last several hours. First of all, I have a cloture motion at the desk with respect to the conference report to accompany H.R. 3288.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the mandatory quorum be waived.

Mr. President, I now ask unanimous consent that the Senate resume consideration of H.R. 3590, the health care bill, for the purposes of considering the pending Crapo motion to commit and the Dorgan amendment No. 2739, as modified; that Senator Baucus be recognized to call up his side-by-side amendment to the Crapo motion; that once that amendment has been reported by number, Senator Lautenberg be recognized to call up his side-by-side amendment to the Dorgan amendment, as modified; that prior to each of the votes specified in this agreement, there be 5 minutes of debate equally divided and controlled in the usual form; that upon the use or yielding back of the time, the Senate proceed to vote in relation to the Lautenberg amendment; that upon disposition of the Lautenberg amendment, the Senate then proceed to vote in relation to the Dorgan amendment; that upon disposition of that amendment, the Senate proceed to vote in relation to the Baucus amendment; that upon disposition of that amendment, the Senate proceed to vote in relation to the Crapo motion to commit; that no other amendments be in order during the pendency of this agreement; that the above-referenced amendments and motion to commit be subject to an affirmative 60-vote threshold and that if they achieve that threshold, then they be agreed to and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table; that if they do not achieve that threshold, then they be withdrawn.

Mr. President, reserving the right to object.

Just this afternoon, my friend, the Republican leader, said--and I quote--``I think it is pretty hard to argue with a straight face that we're''--``we'' meaning Republicans--"not trying to proceed to amend and have votes on this bill. That's what we desire to do.''

Mr. President, it is obvious the Republicans have said privately to their friends and publicly here and in the media that this is a bill they want to kill. To think they are interested in doing something that is positive about this stretches the imagination.

Also, let me just say this. I did not come to this body yesterday. I am not the expert with procedures in the Senate, but I am pretty good. I want everyone to understand this is a ploy procedurally to stop us from completing this bill. We are not going to have a bunch of amendments stacked up. Amendments have been offered. We are agreeing to vote on the amendments. We know the drug importation is a difficult vote for the Republicans; it is a difficult vote for the Democrats. But that is what we do around here.

Every amendment we have had so far has been 60-vote margins. This should not be any different. So I want the Record to reflect that we are ready to vote. He keeps talking about ``since Tuesday.'' There have been quite a few things going on around here since Tuesday. It is not as if we have been sitting around staring in space. There has been good debate on the Senate floor. It is just that we have amendments that would--if we move off the motion they have filed, it creates a procedural issue that we would have difficulty getting out of. That is why they are wanting to do that. We have to clear the deck, continue offering amendments, as we have. I think that is the right way to do it.

So, Mr. President, I object.

Mr. President, this is no sucker punch the Democrats have just leveled to the Republicans. This amendment was previously offered by Senator Cochran, a Republican, that Senator Lautenberg is offering. This is something people have known about for a long time. So I understand people may have forgotten what was in that. They can have the evening to look it over. But I will renew my request tomorrow. We are ready to legislate.

Mr. President, I appreciate the attitude of the Republican leader. I think it is fair to have a chance to look at that amendment. We will be here in the morning and try to work through this.

Mr. President, following leader marks, the Senate will resume consideration of the health care reform legislation. Following remarks by the chairman and ranking member of the Finance Committee or their designees, the next 2 hours will be equally divided and controlled between the two leaders or their designees, with Senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each. The Republicans will control the first 30 minutes and the majority will control the second 30 minutes. The remaining time will be equally divided and used in alternating fashion. No amendments are in order during the controlled time. Rollcall votes could occur this afternoon, but at this stage we have no knowledge that we have worked anything out and don't know if we will. We will do our best to give Members as much notice as possible.

Mr. President, much of this momentous health care debate revolves around numbers, as it should. We read them in reports, see them in charts, and hear about them in speeches. The state of health care in this country is in such a severe crisis that these numbers are often quite overwhelming. Today, I want to talk about 1 number--31. It has a special significance, especially today, along the course of this long, historic pursuit to make it possible for every American to have health insurance and good health.

First, let's discuss the future.

The number 31 is a powerful reminder of both the great opportunity before us and the great cost of inaction, a tangible illustration of what we stand to gain and what we stand to lose. When we pass this bill, 31 million Americans who today have no health insurance will have health insurance at long last. That means they no longer will have to put off the surgery they need and will be able to finally use prescriptions as prescribed--not half a pill every day, a whole pill every day. It means 31 million Americans will have a decent shot at a healthy life.

If we don't act, if we let misinformation confuse us or let distractions divert us or refuse to answer the American people's call to action, many more will suffer. In Nevada, like every other State, health insurance costs continue to climb. If we don't act, in just 6 years, the typical Nevada family will spend more than 31 percent of their income on health care premiums. Almost a third of every Nevadan's paycheck will go right to his or her insurance company. That number is even higher on average throughout the country but only if we do nothing.

Second, let's talk for just a little bit about today, the present.

Right now, every 31 minutes insurance companies terminate insurance for 300 Americans. Sometimes it is because you lost your job, because you lost your health care when you lost your job. Sometimes it is because you change your job but your health care company doesn't come along with your job change. And sometimes, at the very time you need it the most, the insurance company says: Sorry. We are not going to continue the insurance we have given you before. Because they want to make more money, a greedy health insurance company looks at your medical history and says: I am sorry, but we are going to take it away from you. You have no recourse. Maybe you have had high cholesterol your whole life or maybe acne as a child or you had a C-section as an adult. Health insurance companies have used all these reasons to drop someone's coverage. Maybe you had minor surgery 10 years ago or your mother had breast cancer or your father had heart disease. That is all it takes. We all know that, much like our Republican colleagues, insurance companies will use any excuse in the book to say no.

But that statistic, that every 31 minutes in America more than 300 people lose their health insurance coverage, what does that really mean? Imagine if the Senate gallery--600 people can be seated in our galleries--imagine if every single one of these seats was filled by a good American citizen who wanted to look over the Senate and they all had health care when they came in here. Imagine that each of them came this morning to watch their government work, to observe the proceedings here on the floor for an hour or so. Then each of them went on their way when that hour came to a close, but on their way out the door they were told that no longer would they have health care. That is what is happening right now in America, the wealthiest and greatest country in the world. Every 31 minutes, 300 more people lose their health coverage.

Third and finally, let's talk about the past. Let's put the historical moment upon us in the context of history.

It was 31 years ago this day that Senator Ted Kennedy gave one of the most profound and stirring speeches both of his remarkable life and in the history of the Senate and certainly in the history of our Nation's long health care debate. In that talk, he made an observation that rings just as true today as it did more than three decades ago. He said:

One of the most shameful things about modern America is

that in our unbelievably rich land, the quality of the health

care available to many of our people is unbelievably poor and

the cost is unbelievably high.

Senator Kennedy observed how out of control costs were back in 1978 and warned how quickly they would rise if we did not act.

Well, we didn't act. In the past 31 years, health care costs have skyrocketed, and that is a gross understatement. The number of uninsured Americans has done the same. We have 50 million now uninsured and more bankruptcies than ever. Three out of five are because of medical expenses. Other countries have no bankruptcies because of medical expenses. Germany, France, Great Britain, Japan--they don't have bankruptcies because of health expenses. The cost of prescription drugs has doubled in just the past decade, and far fewer small businesses can afford to cover their workers. One more thing has happened: The resistance of the health insurance industry and congressional Republicans to change the American people's demand has only become more tone deaf and more intense.

If we don't act at this time, those terrible trends will only continue. I can hear Senator Kennedy now. I wasn't here 31 years ago, but I can hear him because I listened to him very closely for more than 31 years. Costs will continue to go up without end. More Americans who have health insurance today will lose it. More patients will die of diseases we know how to treat. As the crisis spirals, insurance company executives will laugh all the way to the bank. One company made $1 billion last year; the chief executive took home $100 million. How is that?

Much of the health care debate revolves around numbers, but at its heart, it is really about people. On December 9, 1978, 31 years ago, Senator Ted Kennedy asked us to recognize that health care is ``a basic right for all, not just an expensive luxury for the few.'' A generation later, good health is still a luxury in this country. We are working day and night to see if we can help the generation that is here now and generations to come. If we don't, they will have the same memories 31 years from now as Senator Kennedy prophesied 31 years ago.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the Senate stand in recess until 6:15 p.m. today; that upon reconvening at 6:15, the Senate continue in debate-only posture for an additional hour under the same conditions and limitations specified under previous orders.

Mr. President, I would also tell everyone here there will be no more votes tonight. I don't think we can arrange any.

Thereupon, the Senate, at 5:06 p.m., recessed until 6:15 p.m. and reassembled when called to order by the Presiding Officer (Mr. Brown.)

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senator from Ohio be recognized following my statement.

Mr. President, I had a conversation earlier today with the distinguished Republican leader. It appears now that we are going to get the appropriations bill from the House of Representatives. The bill is bipartisan, and everybody has worked hard. There are some conference reports we have completed. Yet we didn't find them to work on the floor, for reasons everyone understands. That bill will come over from the House tomorrow. We can move to that with a simple majority vote, and then if I have to file cloture on it tomorrow, we would have a Saturday cloture vote. Thirty hours after that--sometime Sunday morning--we would have a vote on the conference report.

I have indicated to the Republican leader that it would probably be to everyone's advantage if we allow people to go home for the weekend, rather than going through all these procedural gyrations.

We have worked hard. I had a Senator come to me and say she hadn't been home in 2 or 3 weeks, and it was not a good situation. That Senator said if we have to be here this weekend, she will be here. We need to not be doing things just to delay. I understand the Republican leader doesn't want to do health care. I appreciate that, and we have different positions on that issue.

I see no reason to punish everybody this weekend. I hope the minority will give strong consideration to the proposal I have made. We are waiting for a score to come back from CBO anyway. Anybody who has had experience with CBO knows that will take a matter of days. So I hope the minority will allow a little bit of time to go by so that we can have our respite from the tedious work we have been doing on the Senate floor.

Mr. President, following leader remarks, the Senate will resume consideration of the health reform legislation. Following leader remarks, the time until 12:30 will be for debate only. The majority will control the first half of the time allotted until 12:30. The Republicans will control the next half. The remaining time will be equally divided and controlled between the two leaders or their designees. The Senate will recess from 12:30 until 2:15 p.m. to allow for the weekly caucus luncheons. There are two amendments now pending. One is the Nelson of Nebraska amendment and the other is the McCain motion to commit. Senators should expect votes after the recess in relation to the pending amendment and motion.

Mr. President, we have scheduled this morning, as soon as the leader time is used, a group of Democratic Senators. These are all new Senators. I hope those people who are watching understand the quality of the people who are now going to make a presentation before this body. The States that will be represented here today will be Oregon, Delaware, New Hampshire, Colorado--we have two Colorado Senators who will speak--the new Senator from Massachusetts, New Mexico, Virginia, Illinois, Alaska, and the opening will be by Senator Merkley and the closing will be by Senator Merkley. Such quality individuals we are so fortunate to have in the Senate. I am grateful for the time they have taken to speak on this issue. Much of what they have done has set the tone for this debate on our side of the aisle. It has been constructive, it has been positive, and it has been very lucid. They were all successful individuals before they came to the Senate. Certainly, that is acknowledged every time we hear one of them say a word here on the Senate floor.

Would the Chair announce the matter before the Senate.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, there were 45,000 funerals in America this year. These funerals, 45,000 in number, stood out from all the rest. Why? They were tearful, as all funerals are. They filled loved ones with sorrow and grief, as many of us know firsthand. But these 45,000 funerals were avoidable. That is why they were more tragic than most, because 45,000 times this year--nearly 900 times a week, more than 120 times each day, about every 10 minutes in America, every day, without end--someone dies as a direct result of not having health insurance.

That is a sickening number. You would have to be heartless not to be horrified. It doesn't even include those who did have health insurance but died because it was not enough to meet their most basic needs. That is what this is all about.

But it is not even just about death. How many citizens in each of our States are bankrupt and broke because of a broken health care system? How many have to choose between their mother's chemotherapy and their daughter's college tuition? How many have to work two or three jobs to provide for a family they never have time to see, all because of an accident they had or an illness they acquired that some insurance big shot calls a preexisting condition.

So many of these tragedies could be prevented. If our Nation truly values the sanctity of life, as I believe it does, we will do everything we can to prevent them. That is why we are pushing so hard to make it possible for every American to afford good health. That is why we cannot take no for an answer, and that is why we will not let the American people down.

That value is also evident in the amendment before us. As some know, for many years--nearly 28 years as a Member of the House of Representatives, of the Senate, and as majority leader--I have consistently cast my vote against abortion.

To me, it is not about partisanship of any kind or political points or even polling data. To me, it is a matter of conscience.

I might not be the loudest on this topic, but that doesn't make my beliefs any less strong. I might oppose abortion, but that does not mean I am opposed to finding common ground for the benefit of the greater good. We can find common ground.

My belief in the sanctity of life is why I have repeatedly voted against using taxpayer money for abortion. It is why I have repeatedly voted against covering abortions in Federal employees health insurance plans and repeatedly voted against allowing Federal facilities to be used for abortions.

But I recognize abortion is an emotional issue. Many Senators in this

body disagree, as many citizens in the country disagree, on the issue. But divisive issues don't have to divide us. There is value in finding common ground.

Among this institution's immortals is Senator Henry Clay, who worked under the premise that, as he said:

All legislation is founded upon the principle of mutual

concession.

It is in that spirit that I have been able to work with my colleagues to my left and to my right--Congressmen and Senators who are pro-life, such as I am, and those who are pro-choice. One of the ways I have done this is by trying to reduce the rate and number of unintended pregnancies.

Our great country leads the world in many ways. But this area is not one in which we take much pride. The United States has one of the highest rates of unintended pregnancies among all industrialized nations, and that is an understatement. Half of all pregnancies in America--every other one--is unintended. Of those, more than half result in abortions.

I have worked to stop this problem before it starts. In 1997, Senator Olympia Snowe and I started the first of many efforts to improve access to contraception. We said health plans should treat prescription contraception the same way it treats other prescription medications. We even passed a law that ensures that Federal employees have access to contraception. This proves what is possible when Senators have different backgrounds, both of good faith, work with each other rather than against each other.

In this case, a pro-life Democrat and a pro-choice Republican followed common sense and found common ground. I have always been appreciative of Senator Snowe for her cooperation and her courage. I continue, to this day, to be grateful.

Let's not forget that the historic bill before this body will continue those efforts. By making sure that all Americans can get good health care, we will reduce the number of unintended pregnancies at the root of this issue. That is a goal both Democrats and Republicans can agree is worthwhile.

Let's talk about current law and this bill. In that and many other respects, this bill is a good, strong, and historic one. It is a bill that will affect the lives of every single American, and it will do so for the better. It will--as you have heard me say many times--save lives, save money, and save Medicare.

But you have also heard me say this bill deserves to go through the legislative process. That process includes amendments. It warrants additions, subtractions, and modifications, as the Senate sees fit. This is an appropriate process, one that has served this body well for more than two centuries.

The amendment before us today, offered by Senator Nelson of Nebraska, would make dramatic changes in current law in America. It is worth examining what that law says, how this bill would treat it and what this amendment would require in addition and then evaluating whether it improves the overall effort.

As current law dictates, not a single taxpayer dollar--not one--can be used to pay for an abortion. There are very few--but very serious-- exceptions to this rule: Those are explicitly limited to cases in which the life of the mother is in danger and when the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest.

This law is called the Hyde amendment. It has been on the books since the late Republican Congressman Henry Hyde wrote it in 1976. I have great respect for Henry Hyde, and I recall with fondness how this Illinois Republican Congressman came to Nevada and campaigned for me. We worked together at a time when a Republican could campaign for a Democrat and vice versa and not fear retribution and condemnation from his own party.

When we drafted the health reform bill now under consideration, we worked hard to come up with a compromise between pro-life and pro- choice Senators. On one side, there are some Senators who don't believe abortion should be legal, let alone mentioned in any health plan. On the other side, there are Senators who don't want a woman's access to legal abortion to depend on which health plan she could afford, and they wanted that reflected in this bill.

So legislating in pursuit of mutual concession, as Senator Clay advised, we struck a compromise. It is a compromise that recognizes people of good faith can have different beliefs, and instead of trying to settle the sensitive question of abortion rights in this bill, we found a fair middle ground.

That compromise is, we maintain current law. We are faithful to the Hyde amendment, which has been in place now for 33 years. Let me be clear. As our bill currently reads, no insurance plans in the new marketplace we create--whether private or public--would be allowed to use taxpayer money for abortion, beyond the limits of existing law.

But we don't stop there. The bill takes special care to keep public and private dollars separate to make sure that happens. This isn't a new concept. It is worth noting this practice of segregating money is consistent with other existing rules that make sure the public doesn't pay for things it shouldn't. It is consistent with the existing Medicaid practice that gives States the option of covering abortion also at their expense. It mirrors practices already in place to separate church and State by ensuring money the Federal Government gives religious organizations is not used for religious practices. So we are not reinventing the wheel.

Just as current law demands, the bill respects the conscience of both individual health care providers and health care facilities. And once again, it goes further. Our bill not only safeguards a long list of Federal laws regarding conscience protections and refusal rights, it even outlaws discrimination against those health care providers and facilities with moral and religious objections to abortion. That means if a doctor does not believe it is right to perform an abortion, he or she can say no, no questions asked. Health care facilities such as Catholic hospitals, which are the largest nongovernment, nonprofit health care providers in the country, would continue to have the same right to refuse to perform abortions.

Under our bill, at least one plan that does not cover abortion services will have to be offered in each exchange so no one will be forced to enroll in a plan that covers abortion services. This is an improvement since the current marketplace does not provide a similar guarantee.

It is clear that the current bill does not expand or restrict anyone's access to abortion, period. It does not force any health plans to cover abortion or prohibit them from doing so, period. Why? Because this bill is about access to health care, not access to abortions.

I have great respect for Senator Ben Nelson. His integrity and independence reflect on the Nebraskans he represents. His strong beliefs are rooted in his strong values. But he shows, better than most, that one can be steadfast without being stubborn. Senator Nelson has always been a gentleman whose consideration is the true portrait of how a Senator should conduct oneself.

I mentioned that our underlying bill leaves current law where it is. This amendment, however, does not. It goes further than the standard that has guided this country for 33 years. It would place limits not only on taxpayer money, which I support, but also on private money. Again, current law already forbids Federal funds from paying for abortions, and our bill does not weaken that rule one bit. I believe current law is sufficient, and I do not believe we need to go further. Specifically, I do not believe the Senate needs to go as far as this amendment would take us. No one should use the health care bill to expand or restrict abortion, and no one should use the issue of abortion to rob millions of the opportunity to get good health care.

This is not the right place for this debate. We have to get on with the larger issue at hand. We have to keep moving toward the finish line and cannot be distracted by detours or derailed by diversions.

Our health reform bill now before this body respects life. I started by saying I believe in the sanctity of life. But my strong belief is that value does not end when a child is born; it continues throughout the lifetime of every person.

With this bill, nearly every American will be able to afford the care they need to stay healthy or care for a loved one. It respects life.

Those who today have nowhere to turn will soon have security against what President Harry Truman called ``the economic effects of sickness.'' It respects life.

Those who suffer from disease, from injury, or from disability will no longer be told by claims adjustors they never met that they are on their own. It respects life.

It will help seniors afford every prescription drug they need so they do not have to decide which pills to skip and which pills to split. It respects life.

It will stop terrible illnesses before they start and stop Americans from dying of diseases we know how to treat. It respects life.

We will stop terrible abuses, such as insurance companies looking at earnings reports instead of your doctor's report and charging rates that make the health we want a luxury. It respects life.

We will ensure the most vulnerable and the least prosperous among us can afford to go to a doctor when they are sick or hurt, not to the emergency room where the rest of us pick up the bill. It respects life.

This bill recognizes that health care is a human right. This bill respects life.

The issue in this amendment is not the only so-called moral issue in this debate. The ability of all Americans to afford and get the access to care they need to stay healthy is also a question of morality.

The reason I oppose abortion and the reason I support the historic bill is the same: I respect the sanctity of life.

This is a health care bill. It is not an abortion bill. We cannot afford to miss the big picture. It is bigger than any one issue. Neither this amendment nor any other should be something that overshadows the entire bill or overwhelms the entire process.

Throughout my entire public career, I voted my conscience on the subject of abortion. As I said, that decision is based on something personal with me. My vote today will also honor another principle I believe to my very core and that I will believe until my very last day on Earth: We must make it possible for every American to afford a healthy life.

I believe the compromise in our current bill and the current bill itself fully fulfill both of these moral imperatives. And I believe when we are given the trust of our neighbors, friends, relatives, the privilege to lead the opportunity to improve others' lives, we cannot turn our backs. We cannot turn our backs on the tens of millions of Americans who have no health insurance at all--none--not thousands, not hundreds, not millions but tens of millions. We cannot turn our backs on the many who do but live one accident, one illness, or one pink slip away from losing that insurance they have.

One of the most cherished charters this Nation has, drafted by one of our most beloved leaders, declared life to be the first among several of our absolute rights. Jefferson put it even before liberty, even before the pursuit of happiness--life.

If we still truly value life in America--and I believe we do--if we still truly value the life of every American, we cannot turn our backs on the 14,000 of us who lose health coverage every single day of every week of every month of every year in this country--no weekends off, no vacations. How many of the thousands of men, women, and children who today will be kicked out in the cold will next year become one of the tens of thousands who die because of it? If we value the sanctity of life, as I know we do, and fix what is broken, as I know we must, we will not have to find out.

I believe in this bill and what it will do for our country for generations to come, what it will do for our constituents, my children, my grandchildren, and their children and their grandchildren. I will not support efforts to undermine this historic legislation.

Mr. President, I rise today to honor Vida Chan Lin. The Las Vegas Asian Chamber of Commerce recently named Vida Chan Lin as their first female president. For many years, Lin has been an advocate for Nevada's Asian Pacific Islander American, APIA, community. Her early exposure to the complexities of business and the APIA community has cultivated the passion and talent necessary for success.

Vida Chan Lin moved to Las Vegas in 1994 and began developing her career as an insurance sales representative. Within a few years, Lin pursued her entrepreneurial interests and launched an insurance agency named V&J Insurance. The company was committed to providing outstanding service and education to Asian and minority communities in Nevada. Vida Chan Lin's success continued when she was named vice president after a merger between V&J Insurance and Western Risk Insurance.

Vida Chan Lin's continued involvement and dedication with supporting local community and business organizations resulted in a significant partnership that benefits families and businesses across Nevada. Lin has also advanced local business endeavors through her work with the Asian Chamber of Commerce, ACC, and the OCA Las Vegas Chapter. During her tenure in ACC, she helped develop annual events such as the Chinese New Year Community Achievement Awards Dinner, Bill Endow Golf Tournament, and Asian Business Night. Her help with the OCA Las Vegas Chapter resulted in two national events to be held in Las Vegas for the first time--the

OCA National Convention and the National Asian Pacific American Corporate Achievement Awards.

Being a leader in the Asian Pacific Islander American community has provided Vida Chan Lin an opportunity to affect younger generations. Her positive attitude and passion for APIA issues brought forth an inspiration within our youth to provide for their communities. Lin promotes and ensures that the voice of APIA youth is heard. She continues to dedicate time for students involved in the OCA Las Vegas Chapter and ACC by engaging them in entrepreneurial development opportunities such as the Clark County Summer Business Institute.

As she continues to advance her career and charitable interests, Vida continues to give great care to her family. Las Vegas is better as a place because of dedicated people like Vida Chan Lin. Vida's dynamic ambition reminds me of a quote from one of this country's greatest Presidents. Teddy Roosevelt once said:

The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena,

whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives

valiantly; who errs and comes short again and again; because

there is not effort without error and shortcomings; but who

actually strive to do the deed; who knows the great

enthusiasm, the great devotion, who spends himself in a

worthy cause, who at the best knows in the end the triumph of

high achievement and who at the worst, if he fails, at least

he fails while daring greatly. So that his place shall never

be with those cold timid souls who know neither victory not

defeat.

Vida is not a timid soul. She strives for success with her family, career, and community.

I know that Vida Chan Lin and the Las Vegas Asian Chamber of Commerce have a bright and blessed future. I congratulate Vida on being the first woman to lead the Asian Las Vegas Chamber of Commerce.

Madam President, following leader remarks, the Senate will resume consideration of the health care legislation. Following those remarks, the first 2 hours will be for debate only, with Senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each. Republicans will control the first 30 minutes and the majority will control the next 30 minutes. The remaining hour will be equally divided between the two leaders or their designees. The Pryor amendment regarding enrollee satisfaction and the Gregg amendment regarding Medicare are pending. In addition, I have been informed by Senator Ben Nelson that he will offer sometime today the abortion amendment, either as the lead sponsor or as a cosponsor. We hope to complete these amendments this afternoon sometime and move on to other matters.

I should inform Members, we will not be in late tonight. There is an event at the White House that a number of Senators will be attending. So we will not be in late tonight, but the rest of the week we probably will be. As I indicated, it appears we certainly have to be in this weekend again.

Madam President, I think everyone will acknowledge the legislatively historic time in which we are now involved. We have tried to get to this point with health care legislation for almost 70 years. We are there. We can see the light at the end of the tunnel, so that people in the future will not have to file bankruptcy because they get sick. That is what happens today. For example, 750,000 people filed bankruptcy last year, as I have said here on a number of occasions, and almost 70 percent of those who filed bankruptcy did so because of medical expenses. In addition, 62 percent of those who filed because of medical expenses had insurance. That pretty well says it all.

There is not one of us who has gone home in recent months and hasn't had someone come to us in a grocery store or some other public event and say: My daughter has diabetes. She is now 23 years old. She goes off our insurance. What are we going to do? She can't get insurance.

That is going to stop. There is nothing the people of America want more than for us to do something about this. They want us to stop greedy insurance companies from denying health care to the sick and taking away your coverage at the exact time you need it the most. They want us to make it illegal for multibillion-dollar companies to say: I am sorry, your high cholesterol is going to prevent us from giving you an insurance policy or you were in an accident and badly injured your leg a few years ago and we can't give you insurance now or you are too old or you have hay fever or you have asthma. We have all heard the stories. These insurance companies say: You are on your own. Why? Because they are concerned more about their bottom line than they are about taking care of the American people. I was here a couple days ago talking about an insurance

company that made more than $1 billion in profits last year. Their chief executive officer made over $100 million in take-home pay. But they are still out denying coverage to everybody. These companies are not good for the American people.

What we want to do is make sure that before people get sick, they get the tests they need before these diseases start. We want women to be able to afford screenings that will catch breast cancer.

There was an interesting piece, sad though it was, on public radio this morning. African-American women get breast cancer at a much earlier age and it is a much more difficult type of breast cancer. That is why what Senator Mikulski did was so important. Women can now, no matter their age, have a mammogram to find out if they have breast cancer. They need these tests. We need to make sure women are able to get Pap smears when they need them and other things that are so important. Men need to be able to check for prostate cancer, which is something that has now become fixed on men's minds. It wasn't in the past.

Seniors want to be able to afford prescription drugs. They want to know their Medicare benefits will be protected.

The American people want us to make it possible for everyone to afford insurance. They know that until we do, those who do have it will keep paying extra to cover those who don't. They want us to cut the waste and fraud out of the health care system so that everyone can save money. They want us to make sure they can choose their own doctors, their own hospitals, and a health plan that is right for them. They want us to guarantee they will be able to afford health care even if they lose or change jobs.

That is why we have written a good bill, one that will make it possible for every single American to stay in a condition known as healthy. It is a bill that will make health care more affordable and health insurance companies more accountable, and it will do all this while reducing the deficit.

Yet, while the American people want us to act, our Republican colleagues in the Senate want nothing more than failure. They wanted us to do nothing. That is why Republicans have sounded a familiar cry: Slow down. Stop everything. Start over.

We have seen it again and again. They like to pretend America's health care crisis isn't a problem, that it can have some little minor tweaks here and there and everything will be fine. They choose to ignore the fact that unfair and unchecked insurance companies are forcing the very people these Senators represent to lose their homes, file for bankruptcy, and even die.

It amazes me that the Republican leader rejects the suggestion that what we are doing is truly historic. In fact, the day before yesterday he said it is ``an act of total arrogance.'' That is a direct quote. I am confident history, ironically enough, will prove the Republican leader wrong. This is indeed historic, as I began my conversation today. I am not afraid to say it is. But instead of joining us on the right side of history, all Republicans can come up with is this: Slow down. Stop everything. Let's start over.

If you think you have heard these same excuses before, you are right. When this country belatedly recognized the wrongs of slavery, there were those who dug in their heels and said: Slow down. It is too early. Let's wait. Things aren't bad enough.

When women spoke up for the right to speak up, when they wanted the vote, some insisted they simply slow down. There will be a better day to do that. Today isn't quite right.

When this body was on the verge of guaranteeing equal civil rights to everyone regardless of the color of their skin, some Senators resorted to the same filibuster threats we hear today.

And more recently, when Chairman Chris Dodd of Connecticut, one of the people who will go down in history as the chief champion of the bill before us, said that Americans should be able to take care of their families without fear of losing their jobs, we heard the same old excuses. Through 7 years of fighting and more than one Presidential veto, it was slow down, stop everything, start over.

History is repeating itself before our eyes. There are now those who don't think it is the right time to reform health care. If not now, when? But in reality for many who feel that way, there will be never a good time to reform health care.

I know this country has never had a place for those who hope for failure. So here is whom I would rather listen to: the men and women in Nevada who write me every day. They are hardworking people, lots of different letters, really sad letters, people who play by the rules and don't understand why their health insurance system doesn't do the same. They write from the heart. Here are a couple of stories I will talk about.

A woman named Lisa lives in Gardnerville, NV, a beautiful place beneath the Sierra Nevada mountains, with her two daughters, both of whom are in elementary school. The youngest suffers seizures. Her teachers think she has a learning disability. Because of her family history, Lisa, the girl's mom, is at a high risk for cervical cancer. Although she is supposed to get an exam every 3 months, now she is not able to get one at all. When Lisa lost her job, she lost her health coverage. Now both she and her daughter miss out on the tests and preventative medicine that could keep them healthy. Her long letter to me ended with a simple plea. It wasn't slow down, stop everything, start over. It was:

We want to go to the doctor.

Another person named Braden lives in Sparks, NV. Sparks and Reno are side by side. Braden works a 55-hour week to support his family, but it just barely pays the bills. It is not enough for him to get health insurance. He had to go to the emergency room--$12,000. It was the only place he could go. He is a brave man, though, and in his letter he doesn't dread the debt he carries, and he is going to try to pay it. He doesn't grumble about how hard he works. But he does have one fear. It is not that the Senate is doing its job. His fear is, as he wrote:

If I was seriously sick or injured, I would lose it all.

That is the way many Americans feel.

Michelle is a 60-year-old woman who lives in Fallon, NV, about 60 miles southeast of Reno. Like so many in my State, she moved to Nevada in the last 10 years. Like so many Americans who keep our economy going, she is self-employed and has to find her own health insurance. She has two choices. One is a company that won't give her a policy because she takes three prescription medications. The insurance company only allows you to have two. So Michelle is stuck buying insurance from the other company, the only one that will sell her a plan. When Michelle moved to Nevada a few years ago, she picked the cheapest plan. Now, within 3 years, her plan costs three times as much. That doesn't include dental and vision insurance. It is very minimal, a bare-bones policy. She is waiting. But she is not waiting for us to scrap everything we have done over the past year and start over. She wrote that she is ``waiting to be old enough for Medicare to afford the surgery my doctor says I need, as I know with my current policy it will cost more than I can afford.''

These are real stories about real people: Braden, Michelle, and Lisa. They are not written with a political objective in mind. I do not know whether they are Democrats or Republicans or Independents. They have no axe to grind, as far as any partisan view. They are written by people who know that insurance companies discriminate against their policyholders, and it is not based, I repeat, on party affiliation. They are written by citizens who know this crisis is bigger than politics, and too big to ignore. They are written by Americans who want to be able to live a healthy life without going broke.

My colleagues on the other side want us to slow down, stop everything, and start over. But the course of our country goes in a different direction, only one direction. We move forward. We make progress. And when history calls on its leaders to make life better for its citizens, we answer, and we act. And we are going to act.

Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote, and I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Mr. President, I have had a brief conversation this afternoon

with the Republican leader. We originally were not going to offer a side-by-side to the Gregg amendment. We have one more vote. We would like Senators Gregg and Pryor to lay down their amendments after that. Because we have told everybody we wouldn't be voting late tonight, we need to complete work on these matters in the morning. So we will debate this tomorrow.

It is my understanding that tomorrow there will be a bipartisan amendment on abortion. We can debate the Pryor and Gregg thing in the morning, and then we will debate abortion, and we will be able to dispose of the Gregg and Pryor matters no earlier than 3:15 tomorrow. So we are going to be debating these two things tomorrow.

I say this off the subject: We have been grinding things out here for some time on a very partisan basis. I was confronted yesterday with an issue. We are here working on a Sunday. We had the President come here to talk to the caucus. The Republican leader said: I don't really think that is fair. Why should we be out of session? It is your caucus. So I said: You keep talking; you can preside. I had no concern about any untoward action taken. In a situation such as that, I had no problem. I trust implicitly Senator McConnell and Senator Kyl.

I hope that is kind of a breakthrough here. We have to start trusting each other. It is rarely done. I have never seen that happen before. I think it is the right thing to do. I am disappointed that there weren't more Democrats listening to what they had to say. From a procedural perspective, I never doubted that everything would go fine.

We are going to have one more vote. We will not be in session much longer today.

A counter to the abortion amendment or something like that?

Just an additional amendment.

Mr. President, I don't really know who is going to offer the amendment tomorrow for sure, but it is an issue I want to get out of the way. I think we all do. So it is OK. It will be our slot, no matter who will be the first person on the amendment.

Amendment No. 2927