Floor Statements

Mr. President, I wish to reiterate the point the majority leader made--that he is anticipating us being in on the weekends--and to underscore why that seems to be necessary, which is because the majority is intent on passing this health care bill that the American people oppose. We know that from all of the surveys.

In addition to that, there are a number of things that actually must be done this month: We have a debt ceiling expiring, or needing to be expanded, according to the administration; we have not passed appropriations bills; there are tax extenders that expire at the end of the year; there are PATRIOT Act provisions that expire at the end of the year. There are many things we must do this month. Yet we are going to spend an enormous amount of time working on a bill the American people wish we would not pass this month.

Let me, first, welcome everybody back--Senators and staff--after what, hopefully, was a restful and happy Thanksgiving. I actually worked Monday and Tuesday of last week, and I had a chance to spend a good deal of time out in my State of Kentucky with a number of folks. I must tell you nobody was shy about telling me what they thought about the health care bill. Nobody was shy about it. They had obviously been paying a lot of attention to it. Many had focused on the vote to proceed to this 2,074-page bill, Saturday a week ago. Many people have an opinion. So far, not a single, solitary Kentuckian did I run into-- admittedly, this is anecdotal--but not a single, solitary one said anything other than you have to stop that health care bill. I assured them we were going to do the very best we could to either dramatically change it by amendment or, hopefully, on a bipartisan basis, keep this 2,074-page bill from passing.

A lot of people I met had that kind of observation. I expect it is pretty similar across the country. Kentuckians want to know how spending trillions of dollars we don't have on a plan that raises health insurance premiums and taxes on families and small businesses is good for health care or for jobs or for the economy, for that matter. The fact is, Americans feel like they have been taken for a ride in this debate, and they are beginning to realize what administration officials meant when they said a crisis was a terrible thing to waste. Early this year, they said: A crisis is a terrible thing to waste.

The notion that we would even consider spending trillions of dollars we don't have in a way the majority of Americans don't even want is proof this health care bill is completely and totally out of touch with the American people. It is now perfectly clear what happened. The administration and its allies in Congress have wanted to push government-run health care for many years, and they view the economic crisis we are in as their moment to do it. So they sold their plan as an antidote to the recession, even though their plan would only make things worse. But now Americans are beginning to see the truth behind the rhetoric. No one believes--no one--that trillions in spending, taxes, and debt will do anything but kill jobs and darken the economic prospects of struggling Americans and their children.

The administration's health care plan will not alleviate the situation we are in. Instead, it would punish struggling Americans at a moment when all they want is a little help.

Proponents of this bill couch their efforts with the refrain that history is calling. I think they have got it half right. Someone's calling all right, but it is not history. It is the American worker. He is wondering where the jobs are. It is the middle-class family wondering how Congress could try to pass a scheme that won't do anything to control costs. It is one of the roughly 40 million seniors wondering when Medicare became a piggy bank to fund more government and higher premiums.

I have enumerated the specifics about the Medicare cuts in this bill before: nearly $135 billion in cuts to hospitals, $120 billion in cuts to Medicare Advantage, nearly $15 billion in cuts to nursing homes, more than $40 billion from home health agencies, early $8 billion from hospices--hospices. Nearly one-half trillion dollars in cuts: this is what some have audaciously started referring to as ``Saving Medicare.'' I don't know what's more preposterous: saying that this plan ``saves Medicare,'' or thinking that people will actually believe you.

Arthur Diersing gets it. He is a constituent of mine from Versailles, KY. Here's what he had to say about this plan. He wrote:

I . . . agree that there are some things in the health care

system that need to be fixed or improved. But let's work on

the most important 5-6 issues rather than turn the whole

system upside down, and run up the cost for all of us and

take away from us seniors.

Mr. Diersing knows what he is talking about. He knows this bill doesn't reflect the views of the American people. Americans have been asking us to cut costs, not raise them. They want the kinds of step-by- step reforms that would actually make a difference, without bankrupting the country and without further expanding the role of the government in their lives. Americans don't want this bill to pass. Instead, they want us to earn their trust with the kind of commonsense reforms Republicans have been talking about all year and which our friends have brushed aside.

Americans want us to end junk lawsuits against doctors and hospitals that drive up costs. And yet there is not a serious word about doing so in the 2,074 pages of the Democrat bill. Americans want us to encourage healthy choices like prevention and wellness programs. And yet Democrat leaders couldn't come up with a serious word about these kinds of reforms in 2,074 pages.

Americans want us to lower costs by letting consumers buy coverage across State lines. They want us to let small businesses band together to negotiate lower insurance rates. And yet Democrats have ignored both of these ideas, despite having 2,074 pages to include such ideas.

Americans also want us to address the rampant waste, fraud, and abuse in the current system before we create an entirely new government program. And yet Democrats don't seriously confront this problem in their 2,074 page monument to more government, more taxes, more spending, and more debt.

Americans are fed up with big-government solutions that drive up taxes and debt and which only seem to create more problems, more abuse, and more fraud.

In the face of this, our friends on the other side of the aisle appear determined to plow ahead with their plans. They don't seem to care that Americans are telling them to stop and start over and fix the problem, which is health care costs.

Democrat leaders may think they hear history calling. But the sounds they should be hearing are the voices and the concerns of ordinary Americans. The American people will be heard in this debate, I assure you. In a democracy, public opinion should not be and never is irrelevant.

At the beginning of the health care debate, we were told this $1 trillion experiment would actually lower premiums for American families. Yet just this morning, this very morning, the independent Congressional Budget Office provided an analysis showing that the Democratic bill will actually increase premiums for American families. That is the CBO this morning. It indicated this will actually increase premiums for American families. So a bill that is being sold as a way to reduce costs actually drives them up.

The bottom line is this: After 2,074 pages and trillions more in government spending, massive new taxes and one-half trillion dollar cuts in Medicare, most people, according to the Congressional Budget Office--most people--will see their insurance premiums go up. This is not what the American people are asking for, and it certainly is not reform.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, as we move toward tonight's all- important vote, we will have 10 more hours of discussion of this 2,074- page bill, which represents the top part of this stack. The other 2,000-page bill is the House-passed bill. Senators will have an opportunity to express themselves on the merits of this proposal.

What do we know for sure as we move toward this debate? We know Americans oppose this bill. They are not buying the claim that this legislation would do anything whatsoever to lower our staggering deficits.

In tomorrow's Washington Post, David Broder, their distinguished senior columnist, certainly not a political conservative, expresses his reservations as a citizen about the steps we could be about to take. Broder says, in part, in his column:

The day after the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) gave

its qualified blessing to the version of health care reform

produced by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Quinnipiac

University poll of a national cross section of voters

reported its latest results.

The reason Broder picks Quinnipiac, he said, is he is familiar with the pollsters and the process, knows they are thoroughly nonpartisan and credible. Of course, the Quinnipiac Poll is echoed by every other poll we have seen, no matter who has taken it. We know the American people are opposed to this 2,074-page proposal.

Broder points out that in the Quinnipiac survey, less than one-fifth of voters, 19 percent--a near 19 percent of the sample--support this bill.

Nine of 10 Republicans and eight of 10 independents said

that whatever passes will add to the torrent [a literal

torrent] of red ink. By a margin of four to three--

This is extremely significant--

By a margin of four to three, even Democrats agree this is

likely [that this will produce a torrent of red ink].

That fear contributed directly to the fact that, by a 16-

point margin, the majority in this poll said they oppose this

legislation moving through Congress.

It is not just the American people who are saying that, the experts are saying it as well. Broder points out that every expert--this is Broder:

[E]very expert I have talked to says that the public has it

right.

In other words, the experts agree with the public opinion polls that this 2,074-page bill is a budget buster. He quotes the executive director of the Concord Coalition, a bipartisan group. He says--this expert says:

. . . there's not much reform in this bill. As of now, it's

basically a big entitlement expansion, plus tax increases.

He also decries the gimmickry involved in putting this bill together. Broder points out the majority leader's:

. . . decision to postpone the start of the subsidies to

help the uninsured buy policies from mid-2013 to January

2014--long after taxes and fees levied by the bill would have

begun.

That is the only way they can make the CBO declare it budget neutral, deficit neutral.

In fact, we know that over a 10-year period, once it is fully implemented, the cost of this will be $2.5 trillion. Americans do not think higher premiums, higher taxes, and massive cuts to Medicare is reform. They certainly do not think it is what we need at a time when 1 out of 10 working Americans is looking for a job and the Chinese are lecturing us about debt.

Do we want to pass this staggering spending program at a time when many would argue our international bankers, the Chinese, are lecturing us about debt? At this time of economic crisis, we need to make things easier for people struggling out there, not harder.

Make no mistake, the Democrats' plan we will vote on tonight would make life harder for the vast majority of Americans. It raises their taxes, it raises their health care premiums, it cuts their Medicare, and drives millions off the private insurance they currently have. When fully implemented, this plan would cost, as I indicated earlier, $2.5 trillion. That is the equivalent of three failed stimulus bills.

Perhaps most shocking of all to most people is the conclusion of the Congressional Budget Office that this bill would actually drive up health care costs, not down. This massive bill, at a time when Americans are asking us to control health care costs, according to the independent Congressional Budget Office, actually drives up costs.

The American people are scratching their heads. They thought the idea behind all this was to try to lower costs. Perversely, what we are doing is the opposite.

Americans will have an opportunity to hear their elected representatives in the Senate express their views on this legislation all day today. Senators who support this bill have a lot of explaining to do--a lot of explaining to do. Americans know a vote to proceed on this bill, to get on this bill, is a vote for higher premiums, higher taxes, and massive cuts to Medicare. That is a pretty hard thing to justify supporting. Every Senator who goes on record saying we need to proceed to this monstrosity of a bill will, in effect, be voting for higher taxes, higher premiums, and cuts in Medicare.

It is a pretty hard position to justify. It is a pretty hard position to explain to your constituents. Frankly, I don't think it can be explained, and I don't think the American people do either.

I yield the floor.

Will the Senator from Arizona yield for an observation?

I certainly share the views of Senator McCain that letting these cuts stand is not likely. On the other hand, the President of the United States said he would veto any measure seeking to reverse these cuts. So we have a Hobson's choice: Either the cuts will occur in which case seniors will be devastated or they will not occur, as the Senator from Arizona has pointed out, and the deficit will balloon further.

Mr. President, the Nation is watching the Senate tonight. The American people know how important this vote is. They have seen the bill the Democratic leaders want to impose upon them, and they want to know where the rest of us will stand.

This bill itself is a massive monument to bureaucracy and spending. But at its core it is quite simple. At a moment when more than 1 of 10 working Americans is looking for a job, at the time when the Chinese are lecturing us about our debt, this bill--this bill right here--costs $2\1/2\ trillion the government doesn't have and cannot afford. It imposes punishing taxes on almost everyone. It raises health insurance premiums on the 85 percent of Americans who already have health insurance. And if that were not bad enough, it slashes Medicare by $\1/ 2\ trillion. Anyone who votes aye tonight is voting for all of these things.

It is a fact: A vote in favor of proceeding to this bill is a vote in favor of adding to the tax burden of the American people in the midst of double-digit unemployment. A vote in favor of proceeding to this bill is a vote to raise health insurance premiums on people who were told--they were told--that they could expect their health insurance costs to go down. A vote in favor of proceeding to this bill is a vote in favor of deep cuts to Medicare for tens of millions of seniors who depend on it totally. A vote to proceed to this bill is a vote to continue the completely out-of-control spending binge this Congress has been on all year. A vote in favor of this bill tells every American family sitting in a waiting room tonight, wondering when they will get to see a doctor or how much it is going to cost: It is not our concern. Worst of all, a vote in favor of this bill is a vote in favor of the spending binge that is leading to a massive and unsustainable, long- term debt that will shackle our children to a future they can't afford.

That is what tonight's vote is all about. If it weren't, none of us would be here on a Saturday night with the Nation watching and waiting to see what we do. They are watching because they know that none of this--none of this--is inevitable.

All it takes is one vote--just one. The simple math is this: If there were one Democrat, just one of our friends on the other side of the aisle, just one who would say no tonight, none of this would happen. The voices of the American people would be heard. We have seen all the surveys. We know how they feel. If one Democrat were to say no tonight, he would be saying no to the premium increases, no to the tax cuts, no to the Medicare cuts--just one on the other side of the aisle. Then we could start over with a commonsense, step-by-step approach to fix the problem that got us here in the first place, and that is that health care costs too much.

That is the sad irony of this whole debate. The problem that got us here is that health care costs are out of control. Yet the neutral, nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, the scorekeeper around here, says under this bill--this massive bill--health care costs are actually going to go up, not down, and the American people thought that is what this whole debate was about in the first place. So 2,074 pages and trillions of dollars later--2,074 pages and trillions of dollars later--this bill doesn't even meet the basic goal the American people had in mind in what they thought this debate was all about--to lower costs. This bill will actually make the situation worse, and now we are about to vote on it.

We have heard some Senators come to the floor today and say that they oppose this bill, but they don't want to stop the debate. They oppose the bill, but they don't want to stop the debate. Nobody is suggesting we stop the debate. No one. Not a single Senator on this side of the aisle have I heard suggest that we stop the debate. But if we don't stop this bill tonight, the only debate we will be having--the only debate we will be having--is about higher premiums, not savings for the American people; higher taxes instead of lower costs, and cuts to Medicare rather than improving seniors' care. That is what the debate will be about.

The American people and 40 of us in this room sitting on this side of the aisle are not asking to end the debate. That is not what we have in mind, to end the debate. What we want to do is change the debate--not end it, change it--because once we get on this bill, ladies and gentlemen, the basic dimensions will not change. The basic dimensions will not change.

So I ask: Why should we consider a bill we already know the American people oppose? This is not anything anybody is in doubt about. The American people think if you don't like this bill, you have an obligation to try to stop it, and that opportunity will come at 8 o'clock.

I am sure this won't come as a surprise to any Member of the Senate, but it is going to take 60 votes to change this bill. That means the bill as introduced--this bill we are looking at right here--will fundamentally be the bill we will be asked to pass sometime in the future. That is a fact.

After tonight's vote we will all go home and face our constituents. We will have to tell them how we voted on raising their premiums, raising their taxes, and cutting their Medicare. For some of us, that is not going to be a very easy conversation, but it doesn't have to be that way. If you want to lower costs and premiums, then we can work together step by step and pass the commonsense reforms the American people have been asking for all along.

We can end junk lawsuits against doctors and hospitals which drive up costs. We can encourage healthy choices such as prevention and wellness programs which hold down costs. We can lower costs by letting consumers buy coverage across State lines. We can allow small businesses to band together to get lower insurance rates. And certainly we can address the rampant--absolutely rampant--waste, fraud, and abuse that drives up costs. All of those, my colleagues, are changes worth making.

The American people are looking at the Senate tonight. They are hoping we say no to this bill so we can start on a better plan that fixes the problem the American people care about most, and that is cost. They want us to start over. There is nothing about this massive bill they like. They want us to start over. They want us to address their real concerns. All it would take, Mr. President and my colleagues, is one Member of the other side of the aisle--just one--to give us an opportunity not to end the debate but to change the debate in the direction the American people would like us to go.

I yield the floor.

I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. President, our good friends on the other side of the aisle have spent 6 weeks behind closed doors putting together this trillion-dollar experiment in health care that raises premiums, raises taxes, and makes drastic cuts to Medicare. We have now had less than 48 hours to look through this 2,074-page bill, but there are 10 things we know for sure that every American should begin to understand. There are 10 things about this bill we can begin to convey to the American people with certainty, starting this morning.

The Democratic bill includes nearly $\1/2\ trillion in new taxes that hit virtually every single American, including, most importantly, middle-class families who make less than $250,000 a year--almost $\1/2\ trillion dollars in new taxes, a substantial part of it hitting middle- class families who make under $250,000 a year.

The second thing we know about this massive 2074-page bill is it will raise insurance premiums for the 85 percent of Americans who already have health insurance in our country. So we know buried in this 2,074- page bill are higher insurance premiums for all Americans.

The third thing we know about this massive 2,074-page bill is there will be huge cuts in Medicare, $\1/2\ trillion in cuts in Medicare over 10 years, and it will limit many of the choices seniors now have.

Additionally, this monstrous 2,074-page bill, according to the Congressional Budget Office, will not lower health care costs. My recollection was that the principal reason we went down this path in the first place was to do something about the cost increases that are hitting American businesses and individuals. So we go through passing, presumably--I hope we don't, but if we pass this 2,074-page bill, we will actually increase costs. The true cost of this bill, which was not stated by the majority at the announcement of the bill--if you look at the 10-year period when everything is implemented, the true cost of the bill is $2.5 trillion. Certain gimmicks were employed to try to make the bill look like it actually was deficit neutral or even raised money for the Government over 10 years. The way that was done was to delay the implementation of parts of the bill. But once everything kicks in, if you look at a 10-year window after everything kicks in, in this monstrous 2,074-page bill, it would actually cost $2.5 trillion, a massive expansion of the Federal Government.

The sixth thing we know about this bill for sure is, if you like the health insurance you have, you may not be able to keep it. Buried in this 2,074-page bill are provisions that clearly indicate that if you like the health insurance you currently have, you may not be able to keep it. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the Democratic bill would force millions of Americans off the health insurance they currently have.

The seventh thing we know about this bill is it would let government bureaucrats dictate what kind of health plans Americans can buy. No longer would they have the option to buy whatever health care plan might make sense for their family. The Government will prescribe what kind of insurance plans Americans can buy and, thereby, of course, what benefits they can receive. Some bureaucrat in Washington is going to dictate the plans that are available for the American people. I suspect people who are young and healthy and have high deductibles may not have that option anymore. Those are the kinds of Americans for whom the cost of insurance is going to go up dramatically.

What else do we know about this 2,074-page bill? It creates a government plan that the Congressional Budget Office has said would bring about higher premiums. The majority has said the whole point of the government plan, having the government, in effect, get into the insurance business, is to offer a lower cost alternative, but the only way to do that is to subsidize costs, ration care, and undermine private insurance, which could lead to a government takeover of health care.

In the Democratic plan, the Congressional Budget Office actually says the government insurance company would have higher premiums. So, clearly, the only way it could have a positive impact on the cost of insurance would be to subsidize costs, ration care, and undercut private insurers. Of course, that would be the first step toward what some of the more candid liberals in the House have said is a single- payer system. They are actually disappointed this bill doesn't go far enough to create a government insurance company, which then leads to a single-payer, European-type system.

What else do we know about this bill? The Democratic bill, for the first time in history, would allow Federal programs to pay for elective abortions. How do people out in America who feel strongly about that issue--what do they say about it? According to an AP story just this morning, a direct quote from the person with the Catholic bishops who work with this legislative issue here on the Hill--here is what he had to say. This is a quote from this individual who works for the Catholic bishops on legislative issues. ``This is the worst bill we have seen so far on the life issue.'' That is from a spokesman for the Catholic bishops on what is buried in this 2,074-page bill on the issue of whether the government will, for the first time, allow Federal programs to pay for elective abortions.

Another observation he made about it--and this is a direct quote, two words by the spokesman for the Catholic bishops: ``Completely unacceptable.'' Completely unacceptable, the abortion language in this 2,074-page bill. That is how the Catholic bishops apparently feel about this.

Finally, Americans should know this bill does not have the commonsense reforms they have been asking for all along. There is nothing in this massive bill about getting rid of junk lawsuits against doctors and hospitals that CBO said costs us $54 billion over a period of time. There is nothing in the bill about leveling the playing field when it comes to health care taxes. What the American people would like for us to do is to, step by step, address the cost issue--to them. This bill doesn't do that in any way.

Americans would like to have health care reform, but higher premiums, higher taxes, and cuts to Medicare that produce more government is not reform. Yet that is precisely what we would get were we to pass this 2,074-page bill sitting here beside my desk.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, for months we have been warning the American people of the Democrats' plans to raise premiums, raise taxes, and slash Medicare in order to fund more government. Americans know that is not reform, and unfortunately the majority has not been listening.

While two committees have publicly reported legislation, the bill we are being asked to consider was assembled behind closed doors, out of sight, and without input from the public for over the last 6 weeks. We are being told we must rush to pass this legislation, even though most of its provisions will not take effect for another 5 years, until 2014. That is a little bit like being asked to pay your mortgage 4 years before you are allowed to move into your house. Americans reasonably want to know: How much will it cost? Will their premiums go up? What is hidden in the fine print? Are favored interests or States getting sweetheart deals? The American people want to take the time to get this right.

Over here, we have the House bill and the Senate bill together, each of them roughly 2,000 pages. You see this massive bill to rewrite one- sixth of our economy, with stunning unintended consequences for ourselves and for our children and for our grandchildren.

The majority leader's bill is 2,074 pages long. When fully implemented--and the way to look at the true cost of this bill is how much it will cost over a 10-year period when it is fully implemented. What has been skillfully done in order to make it look less expensive, in this proposal, is phasing in benefits and taxes at different times. But when this 2,074-page bill is fully implemented, it will cost $2.5 trillion.

According to CBO, Federal health care spending will actually go up, not down, as a result of this mammoth effort to rewrite one-sixth of our economy. It cuts Medicare by $465 billion--nearly $\1/2\ trillion in cuts to a program that is so important to our seniors. Hospitals, Medicare Advantage, nursing homes, home health, hospice--all of those will be slashed in this $465 billion cut to Medicare. It raises taxes $493 billion. So you have here massive cuts in Medicare and massive tax increases.

Who gets hit? Who gets hit with the tax increases? You do. If you have insurance, you get taxed. If you do not have insurance, you get taxed. If you need a lifesaving medical device, you get taxed. If you need prescription medicines, you get taxed. There is also a new Medicare payroll tax.

What is the bottom line here? After weeks of drafting a bill behind closed doors, the majority has produced a bill that increases premiums, raises taxes, and slashes Medicare by $\1/2\ trillion, to create a new government program. This is not what the American people want. I do not believe they think this is reform. This is not the direction to take.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, it has been nearly 30 years now since Senator Byrd started delivering a series of lectures that ultimately became the book that all of us are familiar with and which all of us admire. And the story of how those lectures came about says a lot about the man who has now served in Congress longer than any other man or woman in the history of our country.

Mr. President, this morning, the Attorney General will appear before the Senate Judiciary Committee for an oversight hearing. Among other matters, he will be asked questions about the Administration's recent decision to voluntarily bring terrorist detainees from Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, into the United States, including for purposes of civilian trial.

I, myself, have questions for the Attorney General.

The administration justifies sending Kahlid Sheik Mohammed and his fellow 9/11 plotters to civilian court, while prosecuting other foreign terrorists in military commissions because, it says, the former targeted civilians on American soil, while the latter attacked military targets overseas, like the warship USS Cole. I find this a truly troubling distinction.

First, is that rationale not internally inconsistent and, frankly, disingenuous? Everyone knows the Pentagon is a military target. Indeed, it is our Nation's foremost military command and control installation. What does it say to the military families of those service men and women who were killed that day to ignore that Kahlid Sheik Mohammed attacked a military target on 9/11?

Second, under this rationale, is the administration not telling terrorists that if they target defenseless U.S. civilians on our own soil they will get the rights and privileges of American citizens, whereas if they attack a military target, like the USS Cole, which can defend itself, they will not get these rights and privileges? Does that approach not reward terrorists with benefits--like potentially providing them access to sensitive information, and providing them a platform for propagandizing--for attacking civilians here in the U.S., rather than military targets abroad?

In short, I think the administration has made an ill-advised decision by bringing foreign terrorists from Guantanamo Bay into the United States. There are a lot of well-known

downsides and dangers from doing so. I have not heard of any benefit to us of bringing these terrorists here.

In his testimony before the Judiciary Committee today, the Attorney General has the opportunity to explain the administration's decision-- something he has yet to do before the Senate.

Mr. President, at a time when unemployment is at a 25- year high and with a Federal deficit breaking the $12 trillion mark, the House of Representatives passed a health care bill that raises taxes more than $700 billion. This is the House-passed health care bill on this desk. I expect the Senate version, which may be produced today, will be of similar size.

Who gets taxed under the House-passed bill? Let's take a look.

At the top of the list is small business. A small business surtax in the bill takes $150 billion out of our job creators. That is on page 344 of this massive 2,000-page House bill. We all know small businesses are the biggest job generators in the country. They employ well over half of those who have employment in our country.

Second, we have an employer tax. The employer tax raises $135 billion in taxes through a new mandate on employers. That is on page 281 of this massive 2,000-page bill. The NFIB, the National Federation of Independent Business, which represents small business, estimates that mandate would cost about 1.6 million jobs. That is a 1.6 million job- killing tax at a time when the national unemployment rate is 10.2 percent.

Insured Americans, item No. 4 on this chart--let's look at the tax on insured Americans. Billions of new taxes to pay for comparative effectiveness research rationing in this 2,000-page bill. That is on page 1179, a tax on those who are insured.

Then we have attacks on those who are uninsured, item 3 on the chart. They get taxed as well, a 2.5-percent income tax on the uninsured. That is on page 303 of this roughly 2,000-page bill.

Medical devices, upon which those who are sick depend heavily, will also be taxed. People needing lifesaving medical devices will also receive a tax increase, on page 347 of this massive 2,000-page bill. There will be a $20 billion tax on medical devices. Of course, that will be passed straight on to the consumers. So that will, in effect, be a tax on those Americans who are sick and who need medical devices.

There is also a tax on the chronically ill. On page 332 of this 2,000-page effort to restructure the American health care system, we find flexible spending accounts would be capped at $2,500 and phased out over time. How does that affect the chronically ill? As a result, tens of millions of families, many of whom are managing chronic illnesses, will see billions in tax-saving benefits from these FSAs wiped out, right here on page 332 of this 2,000-page bill.

What does all this mean to small business? David Boland is the manager at Boland Maloney Lumber, Louisville. He wrote to my office to say what it means:

Health care reform that does nothing to control costs--

And we already know from CBO and from the actuaries that the Health and Human Services bill does not control costs--

but merely increases the burden on small businesses through

mandates and tax hikes is a dangerous and risky proposition

that will imperil my company and our national recovery.

Don't take it from me; listen to David Boland. He gets it. He knows that slashing Medicare, increasing premiums, and raising taxes in a recession is not reform.

It was actually a front-page story in the Washington Post this morning, a company in Louisville that kind of underscores what I am talking about. The front-page story in today's Washington Post describes the ongoing struggles of a small manufacturer in my hometown of Louisville who is fighting to save jobs. This business owner wants to be more productive so he can hold onto his workers. But all of these crushing taxes, many of which would apply to his company, are simply not going to be helpful.

Finally, yesterday I spoke about Medicare cuts, the massive Medicare cuts in this bill we are shortly going to be considering. It is important to remember that Senate Democrats recently tried to pass a so-called doc fix that would have forced seniors to pay higher premiums on top of $\1/2\ trillion they want to cut from Medicare. Fortunately, this bill was rejected by a wide bipartisan majority. While we all think this problem needs to be addressed, this is not the way to do it. I am confident that should a similar bill pass the House later this week, we will reject it again on a bipartisan basis.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I say to my good friend from West Virginia, I spoke this morning on his remarkable record of achievement.

We are all proud of your service to your State and to our country. I sent you a note including my remarks from this morning about this remarkable record you have now achieved. Of course, you broke the record of a Senator from Arizona. One of his successors is here on the floor and would like to address that matter as well.

Mr. President, pending the arrival of the majority leader, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, we know the House-passed health care bill will cut Medicare, raise taxes, and raise premiums. We also know the bill being developed by the majority leader will do the same. This morning, I want to focus on the $\1/2\ trillion cuts in Medicare--$\1/ 2\ trillion over 10 years.

We have here the House-passed health care bill in its entirety. This is a 2,000-page, as the Wall Street Journal called it, ``monstrosity.'' In the area of the Medicare cuts, what does that mean? When you say you are going to cut Medicare by $\1/2\ trillion over 10 years, what does it mean? It means cuts to hospitals, cuts to Medicare Advantage, cuts to nursing homes, cuts to home health care, and cuts to hospice. Those vital programs would be collectively subjected to $\1/2\ trillion in cuts over 10 years.

Focusing on hospice, this is the section of the bill that deals with hospice. The legalese is a little bit mind-boggling, but to give you a sense of how these things are written, it says, ``Subclause (VII) of section''--and it goes on:

. . . 1814(i)(1)(c)(ii) of the Social Security Act . . . is

amended by inserting after ``the

market basket percentage increase'' the following: ``(which

is subject to the productivity adjustment . . . ''

Described in another section.

You would have to be steeped in legalese and minutia to understand what that means, so I am going to interpret it for our colleagues so they will know what that means. It means an $8 billion cut to hospice. That is what that language means, an $8 billion cut to hospice.

What does that mean for seniors? According to Victoria Scarborough, who is a nurse in Danville, KY, it means sacrificing patient care. Here is what she had to say about the prospect of an $8 billion cut to hospice:

We are able to do this--provide excellent health care at

low cost--because we are present at the bedside with the

patient, sitting at the kitchen table, holding a spouse's

hand. We depend upon our highly skilled personnel; our

``services'' are our people. For hospices the productivity

adjustment makes little sense, we need our people.

That illustrates the impact of an $8 billion cut in hospice.

On the chart behind me, I mention the other areas that are being cut: hospitals, Medicare Advantage, nursing homes, home health, and hospice, which I just described.

Another cut would be to Medicare Advantage. The section of the bill-- this is the front page--dealing with the Medicare Advantage reforms, they are called, says ``Phase-In Of Payment Based On Fee-For-Service Costs.'' What does that mean? What does ``Phase-In Of Payment Based On Fee-For-Service Costs'' mean? It means that $236 billion in cuts to Medicare will occur--$236 billion in this program out here, Medicare Advantage, that will occur as a result of this bill. What does that mean, the $236 billion of cuts to Medicare Advantage? The Congressional Budget Office has said it means fewer benefits for seniors. That is the Congressional Budget Office that says it means fewer benefits for seniors.

Norma Hylton of Lexington, KY, recently wrote:

Mr. Obama says he'll take away the Medicare Advantage

plans. . . . This makes us very concerned about the

healthcare plans being debated. I truly believe all seniors

(maybe others) will suffer.

We know the overall bill raises taxes, raises health insurance premiums for the 85 percent of Americans who already have health insurance, and cuts Medicare by $\1/2\ trillion. This morning, what I tried to do is point out what some of those cuts mean; what taking $8 billion out of hospice means, this important program dealing with folks who are at the end of life; and what taking $236 billion out of Medicare Advantage means, as a practical matter, to constituents in my State and across the country.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, tomorrow is Veterans Day, the day we set aside to honor the service and sacrifice of the heroic men and women who have served in the U.S. Armed Forces. America remains a beacon of freedom throughout the world today because of commitments and sacrifices they have made. Over the years, many brave Americans donned their country's uniform to ensure we would remain safe and free at home. That effort continues today as our fighting forces courageously defend freedom from threats in Afghanistan and Iraq and elsewhere around the world.

My own State of Kentucky has a proud military history, and today is home both to Fort Knox and Fort Campbell, which together house thousands of soldiers. Many have gone from vital training at these two posts to protecting our Nation in the heart of the fight in Afghanistan and Iraq.

So tomorrow, as America takes a moment to thank these brave men and women who fought to preserve our way of life and to remember the heroes who did not return home, we will also give thanks for the men and women in uniform who are currently in harm's way.

I might say, every Veterans Day I remember my own father, who served in World War II. He arrived in Europe after the Battle of the Bulge and was there until his unit met the Russians in Pilsen. One of my treasured possessions is a letter he wrote to my mother on V-E Day. They called it V-E Day at the time. He wrote ``V-E Day'' at the top of the letter. That began a series of correspondence in that period right after the cease-fire and the Germans' surrender in which he had at one point prophetically--and this was just a foot soldier--prophetically mentioned to my mother after his experience interacting with the Russians in Pilsen that they were going to be a big problem down the road. I thought it was quite noteworthy that a regular foot soldier sort of instinctively understood at the moment that the Russians were an ally of convenience in World War II and not a long-term ally.

Regretfully, both my mother and father are no longer living, but I do remember them fondly and reread their correspondence from time to time of that period when he was overseas.

Later today, the Fort Hood community will honor the victims of the tragic shootings there last week. We were all shocked by the assault on American soldiers right in the heart of a post they call home. We mourn their loss, and we pray for the victims and their families.

In the midst of this terrible tragedy, we also saw the courage of many troops and civilian law enforcement, and we thank these brave men and women for their dedication that they showed in putting themselves in harm's way.

So we honor every American who has fought for this country, and we recognize this country was built on what they have sacrificed.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I associate myself with the remarks of the majority leader with respect to the shooting, the murdering of our troops in Fort Hood last Thursday. I will have more to say about that later.

Mr. President, last Saturday evening, Democratic leaders in the House passed by the narrowest of margins a massive bill with a simple goal: to vastly expand the Federal Government's role in the health care decisions of every American. This bill is strongly opposed by most Americans, which is why one out of seven Democrats voted against it. These Democrats have gotten the message that Americans are fed up with all the spending and all the debt and that they do not support a so-called health care reform that raises premiums, raises taxes, and slashes Medicare. Americans don't want a 2,000-page, trillion-dollar government experiment in health care. They want commonsense reforms that increase access and lower costs.

Soon, Senate Democrats will propose their version of a health care bill. We don't yet know all the details, but we do know that at its core, this bill would also lead to higher premiums, higher taxes, and massive cuts to Medicare to fund new government programs. This is not the reform the American people were looking for. This is not the reform they were told they could expect.

Americans feel as though they have been taken for a ride in this debate. I don't blame them. It is time we listen to the American people. At a time of double-digit unemployment and record deficits and debt, the views of ordinary Americans should not be cast aside.

Mr. President, today marks a very important day in the cause of freedom. On this day 20 years ago, the Berlin Wall, which for decades had divided the free people of West Berlin from the captive Germans in the Soviet-controlled East Berlin, finally came down.

In anticipation of this anniversary, we had the rare honor last Tuesday of hearing German Chancellor Angela Merkel address a joint meeting of Congress. She was the first German Chancellor to do so in more than 50 years. Chancellor Merkel spoke about the experience of growing up with millions of others behind the Iron Curtain. She spoke of how it was impossible for herself and anyone else she knew to travel to America. Yet even as a child she knew that tyranny was wrong and that the answer to tyranny could be found across the ocean in America.

Now decades later, Chancellor Merkel's country has gained that freedom, and a little girl who grew up under a repressive regime is the freely elected leader of a united Germany. Here is what Chancellor Merkel had to say about what made that extraordinary journey possible. She said just last week:

Twenty years have passed since we were given this

incredible gift of freedom. But

there is still nothing that inspires me more, nothing that

spurs me on more, nothing that fills me more with positive

feelings than the power of freedom.

Chancellor Merkel also spoke very graciously of her gratitude, of Germany's gratitude to America. ``I know, we Germans know,'' she said, ``how much we owe to you, our American friends.'' She recalls President Kennedy's trip to Berlin shortly after the construction of the Berlin Wall when he declared his solidarity with the people of Germany with his famous words: ``Ich Bin ein Berliner.'' And she recalled President Reagan's 1987 trip to Berlin when he made a clear and direct appeal to the Soviet Premier for openness with the equally famous words ``Tear down this wall.''

Freedom has its own imperatives. It demanded that the Berlin Wall come down, and 20 years ago it did. It was a remarkable time. After decades of oppression, which the United States met with a sustained strategy of containment, the world witnessed the relatively peaceful liberation of a continent. But for most of us, the most remarkable moment from those days was the moment we saw one of the most potent symbols of the Communist era, the Berlin Wall, come down, piece by piece. We celebrate this great anniversary with all the free peoples of the world, mindful of those who still yearn for the same freedom Chancellor Merkel dreamed of as a young girl. May they all know the freedom that is the birthright of every man and every woman.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.