Senate Passes Resolution Opposing Russian Offer to Question U.S. Officials, 98-0
Senate Session - December 15, 2009

Senators planned to finish debate on several amendments and motions dealing with buying prescription from other countries and middle class taxes.

Speakers:
Time
Action
  • 10:00:06 AM

    none

    CARE DEBATE TODAY. SENATORS PLAN TO FINISH DEBATE ON THE MOTION EVEN WITH…

    CARE DEBATE TODAY. SENATORS PLAN TO FINISH DEBATE ON THE MOTION EVEN WITH THE BUYING PRESCRIPTION DRUGS FROM OTHER COUNTRIES AND MIDDLE-CLASS TAXES TO THE SENATE WILL RECESS FOR SEVERAL HOURS AT 12:30 P.M. EASTERN FOR THEIR WEEKLY MEETINGS. DEMOCRATS WILL BE GOING TO THE WHITE HOUSE TO MEET WITH PRESIDENT OBAMA ON HEALTH CARE. THEY ARE TRY TO COME UP WITH A BILL THAT WILL DRAW THE NEEDED 60 VOTES TO PASS HEALTH CARE OUT OF THE SENATE AND INTO NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE HOUSE. AMENDMENT DEBATE WILL CONTINUE WHEN THE SENATOR'S RETURN LATER AT 3:15 P.M. EASTERN. THE HOUSE ALSO COMING IN AT THIS HOUR. THE RESOLUTION AGAINST THE IRANIAN PETROLEUM INDUSTRY ON THEIR AGENDA. LIGHTHOUSE COVERAGE ON C-SPAN. AND NOW LIVES SENATE COVERAGE HERE ON C-SPAN2

    Show Full Text
  • 10:01:02 AM

    THE CHAPLAIN

    PRAY. LOVING GOD, YOU KNOW OUR WEAKNESSES AND THE EXTENT OF OUR FAILURE TO…

    PRAY. LOVING GOD, YOU KNOW OUR WEAKNESSES AND THE EXTENT OF OUR FAILURE TO LOVE YOU AND ONE ANOTHER. LOOK UPON US WITH MERCY AND USE US TO HEAL THE HURT IN OUR WORLD. ESTABLISH THE LABOR OF OUR LAWMAKERS, STRENGTHENING THEM TO HONOR YOU BY SERVING OTHERS. LET YOUR LIFE-GIVING SPIRIT MOVE THEM TO FEEL GREATER COMPASSION FOR THOSE IN NEED. USE THEM TO REMOVE BARRIERS THAT DIVIDE US, AS THEY HELP ALL TO LIVE IN GREATER JUSTICE AND PEACE. LORD, GIVE OUR SENATORS A DAILY RESPECT AND SUBMISSION TO YOUR WILL AND COMMANDS. WE PRAY IN YOUR SOVEREIGN NAME. AMEN.

    Show Full Text
  • 10:02:32 AM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    PLEASE JOIN ME IN RECITING THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG. I PLEDGE…

    PLEASE JOIN ME IN RECITING THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.

    Show Full Text
  • 10:02:55 AM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THE CLERK WILL READ A COMMUNICATION TO THE SENATE.

  • 10:02:59 AM

    THE CLERK

    WASHINGTON D.C., DECEMBER 15, 2009. TO THE SENATE: UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF…

    WASHINGTON D.C., DECEMBER 15, 2009. TO THE SENATE: UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 1, PARAGRAPH 3, OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE SENATE, I HEREBY APPOINT THE HONORABLE ROLAND BURRIS, A SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, TO PERFORM THE DUTIES OF THE CHAIR. SIGNED: ROBERT C. BYRD, PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE.

    Show Full Text
  • 10:03:20 AM

    MR. REID

    MR. PRESIDENT? PROMISE THE MAJORITY LEADER IS RECOGNIZED.

  • 10:03:24 AM

    MR. REID

    FOLLOWING LEADER REMARKS THE SENATE BILL RESUME CONSIDERATION OF THE H.R.…

    FOLLOWING LEADER REMARKS THE SENATE BILL RESUME CONSIDERATION OF THE H.R. 35990. THERE WILL BE TIME FOR DEBATE. WE CAN NEVER DETERMINE FOR SURE, MR. PRESIDENT, BUT IT APPEARS VOTES SHOULD START BETWEEN 5:00 AND 6:00. THE SENATE WILL BE IN RECESS FROM 12:45 UNTIL 3:15 TODAY FOR THE THE WEEKLY CAUCUS LUNCHEONS.

    Show Full Text
  • 10:04:13 AM

    MR. McCONNELL

  • 10:04:14 AM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THE REPUBLICAN LEADER IS RECOGNIZED.

  • 10:04:17 AM

    MR. McCONNELL

    MR. PRESIDENT, WITH AMERICANS NOW REALLY FOCUSING IN ON THE HEALTH CARE…

    MR. PRESIDENT, WITH AMERICANS NOW REALLY FOCUSING IN ON THE HEALTH CARE DEBATE, IT'S IMPORTANT TO TAKE A STEP BACK AND RECALL WHERE WE STARTED, BECAUSE SOMEWHERE -L ALONG THE WAY DEMOCRATIC LEADERS TOOK THEIR EYES OFF THE BALL. IT'S A GOOD TIME TO REMEMBER WHAT THIS REFORM DEBATE WAS ALL ABOUT. THE GOAL OF THIS LEGISLATION, BY ALL ACCOUNTS, EVERYONE AGREED THE GOAL WAS TO LOWER THE COST OF HEALTH CARE. THIS IS WHAT THE PRESIDENT HAS TO SAY. IT'S A DIRECT QUOTE. "THE BILL I SIGN," ACCORDING TO THE PRESIDENT, "MUST SLOW THE GROWTH OF HEALTH CARE COSTS IN THE LONG RUN." THAT WAS JULY 22 OF THIS YEAR. YET WHERE WE ARE NEARLY FIVE MONTHS LATER, THE ADMINISTRATION'S OWN SCOREKEEPER, THE C.M.S. ACTUARY -- THAT'S THE CENTER FOR MEDICAID AND MEDICARE SERVICES ACTUARY -- SAYS THE DEMOCRATIC BILL WILL ACTUALLY DRIVE COSTS UP, EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE OF WHAT THE DEBATE WAS ALL ABOUT IN THE BEGINNING AND EXACTLY OPPOSED TO WHAT THE PRESIDENT INDICATED ON JULY 22, THAT HE WOULDN'T SIGN SUCH A BILL. REMEMBER, THE PURPOSE OF REFORM WAS TO LOWER PEOPLE'S INSURANCE PREMIUMS AS WELL, AND HERE'S WHAT THE PRESIDENT HAD TO SAY ABOUT THAT. A DIRECT QUOTE -- "I HAVE MADE A SOLEMN PLEDGE," SAID THE PRESIDENT, "THAT I WILL SIGN A UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE BILL INTO LAW BY THE END OF MY FIRST TERM AS PRESIDENT THAT WILL CUT THE COST OF A TYPICAL FAMILY'S PREMIUMS BY UP TO $2,500 A YEAR." THAT'S THE PRESIDENT CAMPAIGNING FOR PRESIDENT, JUNE 24, 2007. "A SOLEMN PLEDGE THAT I WILL SIGN A UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE BILL INTO LAW THAT WILL CUT THE COST OF A TYPICAL FAMILY'S PREMIUMS BY UP TO $2,500 A YEAR." YET NOW WE'RE BEING TOLD BY THE ADMINISTRATION'S OWN NONPARTISAN SCOREKEEPER -- AGAIN THE C.M.S. ACTUARY -- THAT NEW FEES FOR DRUGS, DEVICES AND INSURANCE PLANS WILL DRIVE INSURANCE PREMIUMS UP. THE PURPOSE OF REFORM WAS ALSO TO EASE THE BURDEN ON TAXPAYERS. HERE'S WHAT THE PRESIDENT HAD TO SAY ABOUT THAT: "NO FAMILY MAKING LESS THAN $250,000 A YEAR WILL SEE ANY FORM OF TAX INCREASE." THAT'S THE PRESIDENT SEPTEMBER 12, 2008. "NO FAMILY, NOT A ONE, NO FAMILY MAKING LESS THAN $250,000 A YEAR WILL SEE ANY FORM OF TAX INCREASE." YET NOW WE'RE TOLD BY THE INDEPENDENT AN LIST THAT THE -- ANNUAL LIST THAT THE TAXES WILL GO UP FOR THOSE MAKING UNDER $250,000 A YEAR. PEOPLE WHO LIKE THE PLANS THEY HAVE ARE TOLD THEY'D BE ABLE TO KEEP THEM. HERE'S WHAT THE PRESIDENT HAD TO SAY ABOUT THAT: "IF YOU LIKE YOUR CURRENT PLAN -- IF YOU LIKE YOUR CURRENT PLAN, YOU'LL BE ABLE TO KEEP IT." AND THEN HE SAID, "LET ME REPEAT THAT. IF YOU LIKE YOUR PLAN, YOU'LL BE ABLE TO KEEP IT." THAT WAS JULY 21, 2009, JUST THIS SUMMER. YET NOW WE'RE TOLD BY THE INDEPENDENT ANALYSTS LIKE THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE THAT MILLIONS OF AMERICANS WILL LOSE THEIR EMPLOYER-BASED COVERAGE AND MILLIONS OF SENIORS WILL SEE THEIR EXTRA BENEFITS CUT BY ABOUT HALF. NOW, AMERICANS ARE LOOKING AT THIS, MR. PRESIDENT, AND THEY ARE TRULY OUTRAGED. THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE OUTRAGED AT WHAT'S HAPPENING HERE. THEY CAN'T UNDERSTAND WHAT WE ARE DOING. THE LATEST CNN POLL SAYS 61% OF AMERICANS OPPOSE THIS BILL. 61% OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE SAYING DON'T PASS THIS BILL. THIS BILL IS COMPLETELY OUT OF TOUCH WITH THE AMERICAN PUBLIC. THINK ABOUT IT. ONE OUT OF TEN WORKING AMERICANS IS LOOKING FOR A JOB, AND DEMOCRATIC LEADERS IN WASHINGTON WANT TO SPEND $2.5 TRILLION ON A BILL THAT MAKES EXISTING PROBLEMS WORSE. ONE OUT OF TEN AMERICANS OUT OF WORK, AND YET THE MAJORITY SEEKS TO PASS A BILL THAT MAKES THE EXISTING PROBLEMS WORSE. AND YET, DEMOCRATIC LEADERS IN WASHINGTON ARE STILL INSISTING THAT WE PASS THIS BILL. EVEN AS OPPOSITION GROWS, SUPPORTERS OF THE BILL ARE DRAFTING PLANS AND CUTTING DEALS TO MAKE THIS BILL THE LAW OF THE LAND BY CHRISTMAS, IGNORING THE WILL OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, OFF IN A ROOM SOMEWHERE CUTTING PLANS AND MAKING DEALS, TRYING TO FIGURE OUT SOME WAY TO JAM THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WHEN THEY ARE ASKING US OVERWHELMINGLY PLEASE DON'T PASS THIS BILL. YOU GET THE IMPRESSION THAT THE SUPPORTERS OF THIS BILL THINK IT'S ABOUT THEM, ABOUT THEM AND THEIR LEGACIES. WELL, THIS ISN'T ABOUT THEM. THIS IS ABOUT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. IT'S NOT ABOUT MAKING HISTORY. THIS IS ABOUT DOING THE RIGHT THING FOR EVERY SINGLE AMERICAN'S HEALTH CARE. AND AMERICANS HAVE A MESSAGE: HIGHER PREMIUMS, HIGHER TAXES, HIGHER HEALTH CARE COSTS ARE NOT WHAT THEY SIGNED UP FOR. THIS IS NOT WHAT THEY WERE PROMISED. THIS IS NOT REFORM. YES, DOING NOTHING IS NOT AN OPTION, BUT MAKING CURRENT PROBLEMS WORSE IS WORSE. NOW, MR. PRESIDENT, ON ANOTHER SUBJECT, I WANT TO WISH A FOND FAREWELL TO ONE OF THE NATION'S FINEST TELEVISION NEWS ANCHORS. LOUISVILLE'S OWN JACKIE HAYES. AFTER MORE THAN THREE DECADES IN BROADCASTING, JACKIE WILL BE RETIRING AND PEOPLE THROUGHOUT LOUISVILLE AND ACROSS KENTUCKY ARE SORRY TO SEE HER GO. THE LEVEL OF RESPECT JACKIE HAS EARNED IN THE COMMUNITY IS REFLECTED IN THE MANY AWARDS SHE HAS WON OVER THE YEARS. SHE'S RECEIVED 16 -- 16 -- BEST OF LOUISVILLE AWARDS, INCLUDING NUMEROUS HONORS AS BEST FEMALE NEWS ANCHOR. IN 2005 SHE WAS NAMED BEST OF THE BEST BY "LOUISVILLE" MAGAZINE. SHE HAS ALSO RECEIVED THE STAR AWARD FROM WOMEN IN RADIO AND TELEVISION AND EMMY NOMINATIONS FOR HER WORK BOTH IN LOUISVILLE AND IN PHILADELPHIA. JACKIE'S HAD A LOT OF WONDERFUL EXPERIENCES IN HER CAREER. ALL IN PURSUIT OF GETTING THE BEST STORY FOR HER VIEWERS. SHE'S REPORTED LIVE FROM THE SCENE IN THE BOMBING AT THE 1996 SUM OLYMPICS IN ATLANTA. SHE'S INTERSPRAOUD TWO PRESIDENT -- INTERVIEWED TWO PRESIDENTS -- ONE OF THEM WAS RONALD REAGAN -- OVER LUNCH. SHE'S BEEN A FIXTURE IN MANY LOUISVILLE HOMES AS SHE HAS ANCHORED COVERAGE OF THE KENTUCKY DERBY 25 TIMES. ONCE SHE WENT UP IN AN FA-18 HORPBT WITH THE BLUE -- HORNET, WITH THE BLUE ANGELS, A U.S. NAVY FLYING ACRO BATTIC TEAM. SHE FLEW AT 600 KNOTS, NEARLY 700 MILES AN HOUR, AND WAS SUBJECTED TO SEVEN TIMES THE NATURAL -- THE NORMAL FORCE OF GRAVITY. SHE MAY HAVE BLACKED OUT BRIEFLY WITH ALL THAT FORCE AS THE INSTRUCTOR TOLD HER MOST PEOPLE DO, BUT FOR THE THRILL OF THE RIDE AND TO BETTER TELL HER STORY TO HER VIEWERS, SHE SAYS IT WAS WORTH IT. JACKIE WAS BORN IN PARIS, TENNESSEE, RIGHT OVER THE BORDER FROM MURRAY, KENTUCKY, AND SHE ATTENDED MURRAY STATE UNIVERSITY ON A SPECIAL PRESIDENTIAL ACADEMIC SCHOLARSHIP. SHE WAS NAMED THE OUTSTANDING SENIOR IN RADIO AND TELEVISION AND BEGAN HER BROADCASTING CAREER AT A PADUCAH STATION WHILE STILL A SENIOR IN COLLEGE. AFTER GRADUATING WITH HIGHEST HONORS, SHE WENT TON TO A FULL-TIME POSITION UNTIL MOVING TO LOUISVILLE IN 1980 TO WORK FOR WASH TELEVISION. AFTER FIVE YEARS SHE WENT TO WORK IN PHILADELPHIA BUT IN 1988 SHE RETURNED TO KENTUCKY AND THE RIVER CITY WHERE SHE STAYED EVER SINCE. FOR THE LAST 21 YEARS SINCE RETURNING TO LOUISVILLE, JACKIE HAS BEEN WITH WAY-3 NEWS. SHE IS THE ANCHOR OF THAT CHANNEL'S 5:00 AND 6:00 P.M. NEWSCAST. AFTER 33 YEARS IN BROADCASTING, JACKIE EARNED A WELL-DESERVED REST AND SHE'S LOOKING FORWARD TO SPENDING TIME WITH HER HUSBAND PAUL, THEIR DAUGHTERS AND THEIR DOGS. JACKIE AND PAUL ARE AVID HORSE RIDERS AND I HEAR THEY JUST GOT A NEW HORSE NAMED CHIPPER. BUT JACKIE WILL BE GREATLY MISSED BY THE PEOPLE OF LOUISVILLE AND THE SURROUNDING AREA. EVERY DAY THROUGH THE TELEVISION, VIEWERS HAVE WELCOMED HER INTO THEIR HOMES. NOW WE SHOULD STOP AND RECOGNIZE THAT WE WELCOME HER INTO OUR COMMUNITY AND OUR LIVES AS WELL. SO I JUST WANTED TO TAKE THIS MOMENT TO THANK HER FOR HER INCREDIBLE CAREER ON BEHALF OF KENTUCKIANS EVERYWHERE. MR. PRESIDENT, I YIELD THE FLOOR.

    Show Full Text
  • 10:14:30 AM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    OFFICER: UNDER THE PREVIOUS ORDER, THE SENATE WILL RESUME CONSIDERATION OF…

    OFFICER: UNDER THE PREVIOUS ORDER, THE SENATE WILL RESUME CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 3590 WHICH THE CLERK WILL REPORT.

    Show Full Text
  • 10:14:38 AM

    THE CLERK

    NUMBER 175, H.R. 3590, AN ACT TO AMEND THE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE OF 1986…

    NUMBER 175, H.R. 3590, AN ACT TO AMEND THE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE OF 1986 TO MODIFY THE FIRST-TIME HOME BUYERS CREDIT IN THE CASE OF MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES, AND CERTAIN OTHER FEDERAL EMPLOYEES, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.

    Show Full Text
  • 10:14:52 AM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    MR. PRESIDENT?

  • 10:15:27 AM

    MR. BAUCUS

    PRESIDENT?

  • 10:15:29 AM

    MR. BAUCUS

    THE CLERK WILL REPORT.

  • 10:17:39 AM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THE CLERK WILL REPORT.

  • 10:17:41 AM

    THE CLERK

  • 10:17:46 AM

    MR. BAUCUS

  • 10:17:47 AM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THE SENATOR FROM MONTANA'S RECOGNIZED.

  • 10:17:54 AM

    MR. BAUCUS

    WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO ORDERED.

  • 10:17:58 AM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO ORDERED.

  • 10:18:00 AM

    MR. BAUCUS

  • 10:31:19 AM

    MR. CRAPO

  • 10:31:20 AM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THE SENATOR FROM IDAHO.

  • 10:31:22 AM

    MR. CRAPO

    WITHOUT OBJECTION.

  • 10:31:31 AM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    WITHOUT OBJECTION.

  • 10:31:32 AM

    MR. CRAPO

    I WOULD ALSO ASK, MR. PRESIDENT, IF YOU'D GIVE ME NOTICE WHEN THERE ARE…

    I WOULD ALSO ASK, MR. PRESIDENT, IF YOU'D GIVE ME NOTICE WHEN THERE ARE FIVE MINUTES REMAINING.

    Show Full Text
  • 10:31:38 AM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    OFFICER: YES.

  • 10:31:39 AM

    MR. CRAPO

    MR. PRESIDENT, I'M GOING TO ENGAGE IN A COLLOQUY WITH SOME OF MY…

    MR. PRESIDENT, I'M GOING TO ENGAGE IN A COLLOQUY WITH SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES TODAY ABOUT THE MOTION THAT IS NOW PENDING ON WHICH WE WILL VOTE LATER THIS AFTERNOON OR EARLY EVENING. IT'S SIMPLY A MOTION TO COMMIT THE BILL TO THE FINANCE COMMITTEE AND HAVE THE FINANCE COMMITTEE MAKE THE BILL COMPLY WITH THE PRESIDENT'S PLEDGE. HERE'S THE PRESIDENT'S PLEDGE. IN THE PRESIDENT'S OWN WORDS, "I CAN MAKE A FIRM PLEDGE, NO FAMILY MAKING LESS THAN $250,000 WILL SEE THEIR TAXES INCREASE. NOT YOUR INCOME TAXES, NOT YOUR PAYROLL TAXES, NOT YOUR CAPITAL GAINS TAXES, NOT ANY OF YOUR TAXES. YOU WILL NOT SEE ANY OF YOUR TAXES INCREASE ONE SINGLE DIME." NOW YOU'VE JUST HEARD MY COLLEAGUE FROM MONTANA SAY THAT THE BILL COMPLIES WITH THIS PLEDGE. IN THE FIRST PHRAEURBGS IF -- PLACE, IF THAT WERE TRUE THERE WOULD BE NO HARM IN HAVING THE FINANCE BILL SCOUR THERE IT AND REFER THE BILL BACK TO MAKE SURE IT DOESN'T TAX THOSE IN THE MIDDLE CLASS. BUT THE REALITY IS IT'S VERY CLEAR THAT THIS LEGISLATION VIOLATES THIS PLEDGE OF THE PRESIDENT. AS A MATTER OF FACT, THERE ARE OVER 493 BILLION DOLLARS OF NEW TAXES IN THIS BILL MEANT TO OFFSET THE $2.5 TRILLION DURING ITS FIRST FULL YEARS OF IMPLEMENTATION OF SPENDING IN THE BILL. LET'S LOOK AT THIS NEXT KHAFRPLT IF YOU LOOK AT THE -- LOOK AT THIS NEXT CHART. THIS INCLUDES THE FEES ALSO THAT THE C.B.O. AND JOINT TAXES SAYS WILL BE PASSED RIGHT ON THROUGH TO THE CONSUMER. THERE ARE $704 BILLION OF TAXES AND FEES IN THE FIRST TEN YEARS OF THIS BILL. IF YOU LOOK AT THE TEN YEARS OF FULL IMPLEMENTATION, MEANING THE FIRST TEN YEARS WHEN THE SPENDING ACTUALLY STARTS, THE TAXES AND FEES ARE ACTUALLY $1.28 TRILLION. MY COLLEAGUE SAYS THAT ACTUALLY THIS IS A NET TAX CUT BILL AND THAT IT COMPLIES WITH THE PRESIDENT'S PLEDGE BECAUSE WHEN YOU TAKE ALL THE REFUNDABLE TAX CREDITS IN THE BILL AND OFFSET THEM AGAINST THESE TAX INCREASES, THERE IS A NET REDUCTION IN TAXES. IN THE FIRST PLACE THAT'S NOT TRUE WHEN YOU TAKE INTO ACCOU THE FEES. IN THE SECOND PLACE, I DON'T THINK THAT'S WHAT THE PRESIDENT WAS TALKING ABOUT. HE DIDN'T MEAN, DID HE, THAT YOU WON'T SEE YOUR TAXES GO UP MORE THAN SOMEONE ELSE'S TAXES GO DOWN? NO. HE TOLD PEOPLE IN AMERICA THAT THEY WOULD NOT SEE THEIR TAXES GO UP. YET, WHAT THIS BILL DOES, ACCORDING TO THE JOINT TAX ANALYSIS, IS THAT BY 2019, AT LEAST 73 MILLION AMERICAN HOUSEHOLDS EARNING BELOW $200,000 WILL FACE A TAX INCREASE. NOW, IF THAT'S NOT VIOLATING THE PRESIDENT'S PLEDGE, I DON'T KNOW WHAT IS. BUT EVEN IF YOU TAKE THE NUMBERS THAT THE MAJORITY IS TRYING TO USE HERE AND CLAIM THAT THOSE ARE TAX CUTS -- LET'S SEE THE NEXT CHART -- WHAT MY COLLEAGUE FROM MONTANA IS TALKING ABOUT IS ABOUT $400 BILLION OF WHAT ARE CALLED REFUNDABLE TAX CREDITS. AND HE WANTS TO OFFSET THESE REFUNDABLE TAX CREDITS IN THE BILL AGAINST THE HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF TAX INCREASES AND SAY THERE'S A NET TAX CUT AND, THEREFORE, NO PROBLEM. WELL, FIRST OF ALL, AS I SAID, THAT IS A PROBLEM. BUT SECONDLY, WHAT A REFUNDABLE TAX CREDIT? $288 BILLION, OR 73% OF THE SO-CALLED TAX CREDIT, OR TAX CUTS THAT MY COLLEAGUE FROM MONTANA IS TALKING ABOUT ARE PAYMENTS BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO INDIVIDUALS OR FAMILIES WHO DO NOT HAVE TAX LIABILITY. IT'S A DIRECT GOVERNMENT SUBSIDY. C.B.O. SCORES THESE PAYMENTS AS A FEDERAL OUTLAY, AS SPENDING, NOT AS TAX RELIEF, WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT THEY ARE. AND SO I JUST THINK IT'S A LITTLE BIT LESS THAN CREDIBLE TO SAY THAT WE HAVE A A TAX CUT BILL HERE WHEN THREE-FOURTHS OF THE TAX CUT, THE SO-CALLED TAX CUTS DON'T EVEN GO TO REDUCE TAX LIABILITY FOR TAXPAYERS. YES. A SENATOR: WOULD THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE, WHICH IS NONPARTISAN, WOULD IT SCORE A WELFARE PAYMENT THE SAME AS THESE TAX -- SO-CALLED TAX CREDITS?

    Show Full Text
  • 10:36:11 AM

    MR. CRAPO

    MY COLLEAGUE IS EXACTLY RIGHT. A WELFARE PAYMENT OR A PAYMENT OF A SUBSIDY…

    MY COLLEAGUE IS EXACTLY RIGHT. A WELFARE PAYMENT OR A PAYMENT OF A SUBSIDY TO AN INDIVIDUAL IN THE UNITED STATES WILL BE SCORED AS A FEDERAL OUTLAY OR AS FEDERAL SPENDING, AS IS A RENEWABLE -- EXCUSE ME -- REFUNDABLE TAX CREDIT PAID TO AN INDIVIDUAL WHO HAS NO TAX LIABILITY. BUT LET'S ASSUME THAT WE EVEN ACCEPT THAT ARGUMENT THAT THAT'S A TAX CUT, EVEN IF YOU OFFSET ALL OF THAT, REMEMBER THE ONE CHART JUST A MINUTE AGO SAID 73 MILLION PEOPLE WILL PAY TAXES. EVEN IF YOU GIVE THEM CREDIT FOR THAT ARGUMENT, THERE ARE STILL GOING TO BE 42 MILLION PEOPLE MAKING LESS THAN $200,000 A YEAR WHO WILL FACE A NET TAX INCREASE. MR. PRESIDENT, THAT IS A VIOLATION OF THE PRESIDENT'S PLEDGE AND ALL THIS MOTION DOES IS SEND THE BILL BACK TO THE FINANCE COMMITTEE THAT WRITES TAX POLICY TO CORRECT THAT. THE PRESIDENT PLEDGED, THE MOTION HELPS THIS BILL COMPLY WITH THE PRESIDENT'S PLEDGE. NOW, THE SENATOR FROM MONTANA ALSO USED ANOTHER EXAMPLE, TRYING TO SAY, WELL, BUT SOME OF THESE PEOPLE WHO ARE PAYING MORE TAXES ARE GETTING HIGHER WAGES. THIS IS THE GAME THAT'S GOING ON. THE EMPLOYER OF THESE PEOPLE THAT THE SENATOR WAS TALKING ABOUT TODAY PROVIDES A SALARY AND HEALTH CARE TO THAT EMPLOYEE. AND IN THIS EXAMPLE, IT'S $50,000 OF WAGES AND $10,000 OF HEALTH CARE BENEFITS. THIS BILL WILL NOW IMPOSE A HEFTY, I THINK IT'S A 40% OR 45% TAX ON THIS HEALTH CARE PLAN BECAUSE IT'S TOO GOOD OF A HEALTH CARE PLAN. AND WHAT C.B.O. AND JOINT TAX TELL US IS THAT BECAUSE OF THAT IMMENSE TAX, 40% OR 45% TAX, THE EMPLOYER'S JUST GOING TO CUT THE HEALTH CARE PLAN DOWN TO WHERE IT'S NOT TAXED ANYMORE AND PROVIDE THOSE DOLLARS TO THE EMPLOYEE WITH AN INCREASED WAGE. SO WHAT WILL HAPPEN IS THIS YOUNG LADY WILL GET MAYBE $53,000 IN WAGES INSTEAD OF $50,000, ONLY $7,000 OF HEALTH CARE. AND HER NET EMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION WILL STILL BE THE SAME -- $60,000, EXCEPT THAT NOW SHE'LL PAY TAXES ON AN EXTRA $3,000. SO HER NET EMPLOYMENT PACKAGE WILL GO DOWN, NOT UP. AND SHE AND 42 -- ACTUALLY 73 MILLION AMERICANS LIKE HER WILL END UP WITH A SMALLER EMPLOYMENT PACKAGE, LESS HEALTH CARE BENEFITS, AND INCREASED FEDERAL TAX LIABILITY. THAT'S THE WAY THE BILL WORKS. AND FOR ISSUE AFTER ISSUE, THERE ARE TAXES AFTER TAXES AFTER TAXES IN THIS BILL THAT ARE GOING TO BE PAID BY THE PEOPLE IN THIS COUNTRY WHO EARN LESS THAN THOSE IN THE THRESHOLD THAT THE PRESIDENT IDENTIFIED. AND THAT'S WHY WE SIMPLY ASK THAT THE BILL BE SENT TO THE FINANCE COMMITTEE TO HAVE THIS VIOLATION OF THE PRESIDENT'S PLEDGE AND THIS BAD POLICY OF INCREASING TAXES ON THE MIDDLE CLASS IN AMERICA TO PAY FOR A HUGE NEW GOVERNMENT ENTITLEMENT PROGRAM BE REMOVED FROM THE BILL. A SENATOR: IF I COULD ASK MY COLLEAGUE FROM IDAHO?

    Show Full Text
  • 10:39:21 AM

    MR. BARRASSO

    A NATIONAL PUBLICATION YESTERDAY AND THE HEADLINE IS "MAKING A NIGHTMARE…

    A NATIONAL PUBLICATION YESTERDAY AND THE HEADLINE IS "MAKING A NIGHTMARE OUT OF HEALTH CARE." THE EDITORIAL SAYS TAXES WILL GO UP. THIS SAYS THE PROPOSED OVERHAUL CONTAINS AT LEAST, AT LAST COUNT 13 -- 13 DIFFERENT TAX HIKES. IT GOES ON TO SAY THAT -- QUOTE -- "THE JOINT TAX COMMITTEE" AND IT SAID FOR ANY ONE PERSON WHO MAY END UP PAYING LOWER TAXES, THERE WILL BE NEARLY FOUR TIMES AS MANY, CLOSE TO 70 MILLION PEOPLE WHO WILL PAY HIGHER TAXES. AND THAT'S WHY I'VE BEEN WAITING NOW FOR A WEEK TO VOTE FOR THE CRAPO AMENDMENT. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WAS INTRODUCED LAST TUESDAY. WELL, THE WHOLE WEEK HAS PASSED, AND YET THE DEMOCRATS HAVE BEEN FILIBUSTERING AND PRAOEFRBTING US -- PREVENTING US FROM VOTING FOR THIS VERY IMPORTANT AMENDMENT THAT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AGREE WITH, THAT WE OUGHT TO ELIMINATE THESE TAXES. WE OUGHT TO STICK WITH WHAT THE PRESIDENT HAS PROMISED THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. AS A RESULT OF THE PRESIDENT'S PROMISES, I READ A RECENT CNN POLL, ONE THAT SAID 66% OF AMERICANS OPPOSE WHAT THE DEMOCRATS ARE PROPOSING, BUT IT GETS TO THE SPECIFICS OF TAXES AND INCREASES AND WHAT THE PRESIDENT PROMISED. IT SAID DO YOU THINK YOUR TAXES WOULD OR WOULD NOT INCREASE IF THIS BILL PASSES? AND 85% OF THE AMERICANS POLLED -- 85% OF AMERICANS SAID THEY BELIEVE THEIR TAXES WILL GO UP. SO IT JUST SEEMS TO ME -- AND I ASK MY FRIEND FROM IDAHO, IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE GET IT, AND THEY REALIZE THAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE HIT HARD WITH THIS $500 BILLION OF TAX INCREASES, 13 DIFFERENT TAXES WHICH WILL GET PUT ON THE BACKS OF THE HARD-WORKING PEOPLE OF OUR COUNTRY. WHY IS IT THAT WE'RE NOT ALLOWED TO VOTE ON THIS AMENDMENT? I'M READY TO VOTE FOR THIS AMENDMENT. AND I APPRECIATE THE SENATOR FROM IDAHO BRINGING THIS AMENDMENT FORWARD BECAUSE CLEARLY THE SUPPORT OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE IS BEHIND YOU.

    Show Full Text
  • 10:41:16 AM

    MR. CRAPO

    THANK MY COLLEAGUE FROM WYOMING FOR THOSE COMMENTS AND WOULD GIVE…

    THANK MY COLLEAGUE FROM WYOMING FOR THOSE COMMENTS AND WOULD GIVE STATISTICS TO THE POINT YOU MADE. THE JOINT TAX COMMITTEE ANALYZED THE FOUR BIGGEST TAX PROVISIONS IN THIS BILL AND HAS CONCLUDE THAT HAD ONLY 7% OF AMERICANS WOULD BE RECEIVING THESE SO-CALLED TAX CUTS THAT ARE REALLY SPENDING SUBSIDIES BUT HAVE BEEN CHARACTERIZED AS A TAX CUT IN ORDER TO ARGUE THIS BILL DOESN'T INCREASE TAXES. ONLY 7% OF AMERICANS WILL RECEIVE THOSE, WHICH REPRESENTS ABOUT 19 MILLION PEOPLE. BUT 157 MILLION PEOPLE, ALMOST EIGHT TIMES THAT AMOUNT, WHO GET THEIR HEALTH INSURANCE THROUGH THEIR EMPLOYER WILL NOT BE ELIGIBLE FOR THESE CREDITS. AND THEY WILL PAY ON AVERAGE SOMEWHERE BETWEEN $593 TO $670, DEPENDING ON WHAT THEIR INCOME CATEGORIES ARE, A YEAR IN NEW TAXES THAT ARE CLEARLY AND SQUARELY PUT ON THEIR SHOULDERS IN THIS BILL. I NOTE MY COLLEAGUE FROM TENNESSEE IS --

    Show Full Text
  • 10:42:19 AM

    MR. ALEXANDER

    WANTED TO CONGRATULATE THE SENATOR FROM IDAHO FOR HIS AMENDMENT TO HELP…

    WANTED TO CONGRATULATE THE SENATOR FROM IDAHO FOR HIS AMENDMENT TO HELP THE PRESIDENT KEEP HIS COMMITMENT. THAT'S BASICALLY WHAT IT IS. AND I WOULD THINK THAT OUR FRIENDS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE AISLE WOULD ALL WANT TO JOIN US IN THA THE PRESIDENT SAID WE'RE NOT GOING TO RAISE TAXES ON PEOPLE MAKING LESS THAN $250,000 A YEAR. IT'S AMAZING TO HEAR THE COMMENTS THAT I'VE JUST HEARD. I MEAN, THE WHOLE CRUX OF THE BILL -- WHEN WE STOP AND THINK ABOUT IT, REGARDLESS OF WHATEVER, WHATEVER THE DEMOCRATS DECIDE TO DO ABOUT THIS SO-CALLED PUBLIC OPTION, THEY STILL SEEM DETERMINED, OR AT LEAST THE MAJORITY LEADERSHIP SEEMS DETERMINED TO ENGAGE IN THIS POLITICAL KAMIKAZE MISSION TOWARDS AN HISTORIC MISTAKE. THERE'S ALL THIS TALK ABOUT HISTORY. BUT THERE ARE LOTS OF DIFFERENT KINDS OF HISTORY, AND A LOT OF HISTORIC MISTAKES HAVE BEEN MADE ABOUT TAXES. FOR EXAMPLE, THERE WAS THE SMOOT-HAWLEY TARIFF OF 1930. THAT WAS A BIG TAX. IT SOUNDED LIKE A GOOD IDEA AT THE TIME. PRESIDENT HOOVER, A REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT, RECOMMENDED, THE IDEA WAS TO PROTECT AMERICAN JOBS BY KEEPING OUT CHEAPER FOREIGN PRODUCTS, AND IT LED US INTO THE GREAT DEPRESSION. IT WAS AN HISTORIC MISTAKE. THERE WAS MORE RECENTLY THE BOAT LUXURY TAX. THIS SOUNDS TKPWAOFPLTD IT WAS PART OF THE BUDGET -- GOOD. IT WAS PART OF THE BUDGET DEAL OF 1990. CONGRESS PUT A 10% LUXURY TAX ON BOATS COSTING MORE THAN $100,000. THAT SOUND FAMILIAR? WE'RE GOING TO GET THE RICH PEOPLE. WE DIDN'T GET THE RICH PEOPLE. IT GOT THE WORKING PEOPLE. THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES WAS IT SANK THE BOAT INDUSTRY COSTING JOBS AND CONGRESS RUSHED BACK IN AND REPEALED THAT HISTORIC MISTAKE. THERE WAS THE MEDICARE CATASTROPHIC COVERAGE ACT OF 1988, ANOTHER GOOD-SOUNDING GOAL TO HELP OLDER PEOPLE REDUCE THE RISK FOR ILLNESS-RELATED CATASTROPHIC FINANCIAL LOSSES. BUT A LOT OF OUR SENIOR AMERICANS RESENTED THE IDEAS OF PAYING ADDITIONAL TAXES FOR THAT COVERAGE. THEY REVOLTED, AND CONGRESS LESS THAN A YEAR AND A HALF LATER REPEALED IT. AND THEN WE ALL REMEMBER THE MILLIONS' TAX. THAT'S A -- THE MILLIONAIRES TAX. IN THE LATE 1960'S THERE WERE AMERICANS NOT PAYING HIGH INCOME TAX, SO CONGRESS IMPOSED SOMETHING CALLED THE ALTERNATIVE MINIMUM TAX. AND LAST YEAR IT AFFECTED 28 MILLION TAXPAYERS. SO, I WOULD SAY TO MY FRIEND FROM IDAHO, I THINK HE'S DOING THE COUNTRY AND THE PRESIDENT A GREAT SERVICE BY OFFERING THIS AMENDMENT TO HELP KEEP THE PROMISE. BECAUSE WHATEVER THE MAJORITY LEADER DECIDES TO DO ABOUT THE GOVERNMENT OPTION, THIS LEGISLATION IS STILL, WHEN FULLY IMPLEMENTED, $1 MILLION IN MEDICARE CUTS FIVE YEARS BEFORE MEDICARE IS SCHEDULED TO GO BROKE, ACCORDING TO ITS TRUSTEES. IT'S NEARLY $1 TRILLION IN NEW TAXES IN 10 YEARS WHEN FULLY IMPLEMENTED, AS THE SENATOR FROM IDAHO HAS POINTED OUT. THERE'S NO QUESTION ABOUT THAT. IT'S AN INCREASE IN PREMIUMS FOR MOST AMERICANS, ACCORDING TO THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE. AND YESTERDAY ON THIS FLOOR WE TALKED ABOUT THE HUGE BILL WE'RE ABOUT TO SEND TO STATES TO HELP PAY FOR THIS IN THE MEDICAID PROGRAMS. SO IT'S IMPORTANT TO SUPPORT THE CRAPO AMENDMENT. AND IT'S IMPORTANT FOR OUR COUNTRY NOT TO HAVE THIS HISTORIC MISTAKE THRUST UPON THEM.

    Show Full Text
  • 10:46:07 AM

    MR. ENSIGN

    LIKE TO JUMP IN HERE AND ASK THE SENATOR FROM IDAHO A QUESTION. FROM WHAT…

    LIKE TO JUMP IN HERE AND ASK THE SENATOR FROM IDAHO A QUESTION. FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND -- ACTUALLY, THIS IS FROM YESTERDAY, I THINK IT WOULD BE IN 17 DAYS FROM NOW, BASED ON THE CURRENT BILL BEFORE US, ALL OF THESE TAXES THAT YOU HAVE IN YOUR CHART THERE, THE -- ALL THE TAXES THAT THE PRESIDENT SAID HE WOULD NOT VIOLATE. I THINK THERE'S -- THE ARTICLE YESTERDAY SAID 13 TAXES. WE KNOW AT LEAST NINE ABSOLUTE TAXES THAT WILL GO INTO EFFECT. BUT THE TAX SUBSIDIES, THESE -- THESE PAYMENTS TO FOLKS WHO DON'T HAVE A -- A TAX LIABILITY, THOSE DON'T START -- AREN'T START RECEIVED FOR 1,479 DAYS. ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

    Show Full Text
  • 10:46:57 AM

    MR. CRAPO

    SENATOR FROM NEVADA IS CORRECT. THE FACT IS THE TAXES START ON DAY ONE OF…

    SENATOR FROM NEVADA IS CORRECT. THE FACT IS THE TAXES START ON DAY ONE OF THE BILL. THE SPENDING, WHICH IS WHAT THESE ALLEGED TAX CUTS ARE, THAT MY COLLEAGUE FROM THE OTHER SIDE WAS TALKING ABOUT DOESN'T START UNTIL THE FOURTH YEAR OR 2014. THAT'S JUNS OF THE BUDGET GIMMICKS IN THE BILL IN ORDER TO TRY TO CLAIM THAT IT DOESN'T DRIVE UP THE BUDGET. 10 YEARS OF TAX INCREASES AND FOUR YEARS OF SPENDING TO OFFSET. IT THEY FIGURED OUT HOW LONG THEY WOULD HAVE TO DELAY IT SO THEY COULD CLAIM IT WOULD NOT DRIVE UP THE DEFICIT.

    Show Full Text
  • 10:47:33 AM

    MR. ENSIGN

    ADDRESS ONE OF THE TAXES, THE SO-CALLED CADILLAC TAX, THAT THE DEMOCRATS…

    ADDRESS ONE OF THE TAXES, THE SO-CALLED CADILLAC TAX, THAT THE DEMOCRATS HAVE PUT INTO THIS BILL. THE PROBLEM IS THEY DID NOT INDEX IT FOR INFLATION. SO AS TIME GOES FORWARD, WHAT WE CAN SEE HERE UNDER THE RED -- RED LINE HERE, THIS IS THE THRESHOLD -- THEY INDEX IT FOR WHAT'S CALLED THE CONSUMER PRICE INDEX PLUS 1%. THAT GOES UP A LITTLE BIT. THE PROBLEM IS MEDICAL INFLATION IS GOING UP MUCH FASTER. SO WHAT HAPPENS IS THIS IS THE BLUE LINE IS THE AVERAGE PLAN IN THE UNITED STATES. THAT'S HOW FAST IT'S GOING UP. SO YOU CAN SEE THAT THAT'S MUCH HIGHER AND SO IT STARTS RIGHT AT THIS POINT IT STARTS CATCHING MOST OF THE PLANS IN THE UNITED STATES. SO THIS 40% TAX THAT THE UNIONS ARE RUNNING ADS AGAINST RIGHT NOW, IS GOING TO START GETTING ALMOST ALL AMERICANS' PLANS IN THE FUTURE. THAT'S THE REASON THAT A LOT OF PEOPLE DON'T REALIZE THIS IS A TAX, MAY NOT GET THEM TODAY, BUT IT'S GOING TO GET THEM EVENTUALLY. AND WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN IS THIS TAX WILL BE PASSED ON TO THEM IN LOWER BENEFITS.

    Show Full Text
  • 10:48:48 AM

    MR. CRAPO

    SENATOR FROM NEVADA IS CORRECT. BEFORE I TOSS THE FLOOR TO THE SENATOR…

    SENATOR FROM NEVADA IS CORRECT. BEFORE I TOSS THE FLOOR TO THE SENATOR FROM TEXAS, WHO WANTS TO MAKE SOME COMMENTS, I WOULD JUST POINT OUT, THE POINT YOU MADE IS STATISTICALLY MADE BY JOINT TAX, BY 2019, AT LEAST 73 MILLION AMERICAN HOUSEHOLDS -- THAT'S NOT 73 MILLION AMERICANS, THAT'S 73 MILLION AMERICAN HOUSEHOLDS WILL FACE A TAX INCREASE.

    Show Full Text
  • 10:49:17 AM

    MRS. HUTCHISON

    I WOULD ASK THE SENATOR FROM IDAHO, IF I COULD RESPOND. WHEN THE SENATOR…

    I WOULD ASK THE SENATOR FROM IDAHO, IF I COULD RESPOND. WHEN THE SENATOR FROM TENNESSEE WAS TALKING ABOUT THE LUXURY TAXES AND HOW EVERYONE THOUGHT THAT FELT SO GOOD TO HAVE A TAX AGAINST LUXURY BOATS AN WHO SUFFERED? THE WORKERS. AND THEN THE CATASTROPHIC MEDICARE COVERAGE, WHICH RESULTED IN A TAX ON SENIORS WHO WERE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE THAT COVERAGE AND SENIORS ERUPTED AND THAT WAS REPEALED. AND THEN FOLLOWED ON FROM THE SENATOR FROM NEVADA, WHO TALKS ABOUT THE CADILLAC PLAN, WHICH IS THE HIGH-END PLAN OF COVERAGE. AND I THOUGHT, YOU KNOW, MAYBE CONGRESS HAS LEARNED SOMETHING. MAYBE THE DEMOCRATS ARE ON TO SOMETHING. THEY'VE LISTENED TO THE HISTORY OF ALL OF THESE GOOD-SOUNDING TAXES ON RICH PEOPLE OR PEOPLE WHO BUY EXPENSIVE THINGS. AND AS THE SENATOR FROM NEVADA HAS POINTED OUT, THEY'VE NOW LEARNED THAT THEY REALLY PROBABLY OUGHT TO GO AHEAD AND TAX BOTH ENDS INSTEAD OF JUST THE HIGH END. BECAUSE IN THIS BILL YOU HAVE A TAX ON THE HIGH-END PLANS. YOU HAVE A TAX ON EMPLOYERS THAT PROVIDE TOO MUCH COVERAGE. OH, BUT WE ALSO TAX THE PEOPLE WHO DON'T HAVE ANY COVERAGE. SO IF IT'S TOO SMALL, YOU GET TAXED AND IF IT'S TOO BIG YOU GET TAXED. SO IT -- IT SEEMS LIKE MAIBT DEMOCRATS LEARNED THE WRONG LESSON, AND IT'S NOT THAT YOU TAX JUST THE RICH OR THE PEOPLE WHO BUY EXPENSIVE THINGS NOW, IT'S THAT YOU TAX BOTH ENDS TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU GET EVERY LITTLE DROP OF TAXPAYERS' DOLLARS. WELL, I THINK WE HAVE SHOWN ON THIS FLOOR FROM THE ENDLESS HOURS OF DEBATE THAT EVERYONE IN AMERICA IS GOING TO BE TAXED. BECAUSE THE TAXES THAT TAKE EFFECT IN THREE WEEKS TIMES UNDER THIS BILL, JANUARY OF 2010, THE MAJOR TAX INCREASE TAKES PLACE. AND THAT'S THE TAX INCREASE ON PRESCRIPTION DRUGS, ON INSURANCE COMPANIES. THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO RAISE THEIR PREMIUMS. THE DRUG COSTS ARE GOING TO GO UP, AND MEDICAL EQUIPMENT, WHICH IS THE ESSENTIAL FOR SENIORS, ESPECIALLY FOR EVERYONE WHO NEEDS SOME FORM OF EQUIPMENT, THE EQUIPMENT MANUFACTURERS ARE GOING TO HAVE THE TAX. SO $100 BILLION IN NEW TAXES START NEXT JANUARY, THREE WEEKS FROM NOW. SO EVERY PERSON IN AMERICA IS GOING TO PAY TAXES IN THE FORM OF HIGHER PRICES STARTING IN THREE WEEKS SO THEN THE SENATOR FROM SOUTH DAKOTA AND I ARE SPONSORING THE LEGISLATION BECAUSE THE NEXT QUESTION WOULD BE: OH, WELL, MY GOODNESS IF WE'RE GOING TO BE TAXED IN THREE WEEKS, SURELY WE'RE GOING TO HAVE SOME SORT OF BENEFIT OFFERED IN THREE WEEKS. SOME SORT OF LOW-COST HEALTH PLAN OR OPTION. THREE WEEKS, SURELY. OH, NO. NO. WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE ANY OF THE PLAN THAT WOULD OFFER OPTIONS TO PEOPLE. NOT IN 2010. NOT IN 2011. NO, NOT IN 2012. NOT IN 2013, BUT 2014. SO ALL THESE HIGHER PRICES ARE GOING TO START KICKING IN IN JANUARY AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THE CADILLAC PLAN THAT THE SENATOR FROM NEVADA MENTIONED IN 2013 ALL BEING PAID BEFORE ONE SUPPOSED BENEFIT WOULD BE AVAILABLE. IF THIS IS NOT A BAIT AND SWITCH, NEVER SEEN ONE. AND THE SENATOR FROM SOUTH DAKOTA AND I ARE GOING TO OFFER THE NEXT AMENDMENT AFTER THE ONES THAT ARE IN THE TRANCHE RIGHT NOW TO JUST VERY SIMPLY SAY WHATEVER THE BILL IS IN THE END THERE WILL BE NO TAXES UNTIL THERE WILL IS A PLAN. NOT ONE DIME OF TAXES COULD TAKE EFFECT UNTIL THERE IS ACTUALLY SOME SORT OF PLAN AVAILABLE THAT WOULD, HOPEFULLY, GIVE SOME SORT OF BENEFIT TO PEOPLE, WHICH IS WHAT IS BEING PROMISED. SO I WOULD JUST ASK THE SENATOR FROM SOUTH DAKOTA IF -- IF THAT'S HIS UNDERSTANDING, THAT WE WOULD AT LEAST DRAW A LINE AND WHEREAS SENATOR CRAPO'S MOTION, WHICH I SUPPORT AND I KNOW EVERYONE ON THE FLOOR TALKING THIS MORNING SUPPORTS TO SAY THAT THERE WILL BE NO TAXES TO ANYONE WHO MAKES UNDER $200,000. BUT EVEN IF THERE ARE TAXES IN THE END, THEY WON'T TAKE EFFECT UNTIL THERE IS SOME SORT OF PLAN AVAILABLE FOR PEOPLE THAT IS GOING TO HELP AMERICANS WHO DON'T HAVE COVERAGE AND FOR WHOM WE'RE NOT ABLE TO LOWER THE COSTS, WHICH THE REPUBLICANS ARE TRYING TO DO, AT LEAST WE WOULD SET THAT DEADLINE. AND I WOULD JUST ASK THE SENATOR FROM SOUTH DAKOTA WHAT HE'S BEEN HEARING ABOUT THIS BILL.

    Show Full Text
  • 10:54:43 AM

    MR. THUNE

    MY COLLEAGUE FROM TEXAS IS EXACTLY RIGHT. AND HER AMENDMENT AND THE…

    MY COLLEAGUE FROM TEXAS IS EXACTLY RIGHT. AND HER AMENDMENT AND THE AMENDMENT THAT I'M COSPONSORING, WHICH WE HOPE TO VOTE ON NEXT, WILL BE A FOLLOW-ON AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT THAT THE SENATOR FROM IDAHO IS OFFERING. BUT IT JUST SEEMS A BASIC PRINCIPLE AND MATTER OF FAIRNESS TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. THAT IF YOU ARE GOING TO CREATE PUBLIC POLICY, THAT YOU DO IT IN A WAY THAT TREATS PEOPLE FAIRLY AND DOESN'T RAISE THEIR TAXES BEFORE A SINGLE DOLLAR OF THE PREMIUM TAX CREDITS AND THE EXCHANGES THAT ARE DESIGNED TO CREATE THE NEW INSURANCE PRODUCT FOR PEOPLE WOULD TAKE EFFECT. AND THAT'S WHAT THIS BILL DOES. THE SENATOR FROM IDAHO, HIS AMENDMENT THAT RECOMMITS ALL OF THE TAX INCREASES, AND I WILL SUPPORT THAT WHOLEHEARTEDLY, BECAUSE THESE TAX INCREASES ARE THE ABSOLUTE WORST THING WE CAN DO AT A TIME WHEN WE HAVE AN ECONOMY IN RECESSION AND WE'RE ASKING SMALL BUSINESSES TO LEAD US OUT OF THE SMALL BUSINESSES. 70% OF THE JOBS IN THIS COUNTRY ARE CREATED BY SMALL BUSINESSES. IT IS MUCH HIGHER IN MY STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA. THESE TAX INCREASES COULDN'T BE MORE POORLY TIMED IN TERMS OF GETTING THE ECONOMY RESTARTED AND CREATING JOBS FOR AMERICANS AND GETTING THEM BACK TO WORK. OF COURSE, SINCE MOST PEOPLE GET THEIR INSURANCE AT LEAST CURRENTLY THROUGH THEIR MICROONE OF THE BEST THINGS TO PROVIDE INSURANCE IS TO PUT PEOPLE BACK TO WORK. THIS BILL WOULD HAVE THE OPPOSITE EFFECT. AS IT JOB KILLER BECAUSE OF ALL OF THE TAX INCREASES AND EVERY SMALL BUSINESS ORGANIZATION HAS SAID THAT. IT'S WHY IT IS SO IMPORTANT TO SUPPORT THE SENATOR FROM IDAHO'S AMENDMENT. SENATOR HUTCHISON AND I WILL OFFER THIS AMENDMENT HOPEFULLY WE'LL GET A VOTE ON LATER THAT WILL AT LEAST DELAY THE TAX INCREASES UNTIL SUCH TIME AS THE BENEFITS BEGIN. IT ESSENTIALLY ALLIANCE THE REVENUE INCREASES AND THE BEN BENEFITS SO THAT THEY'RE SYNCHORNIZED AND YOU DON'T HAVE THIS PERIOD OF 10 YEARS WHERE YOU'RE TAXING PEOPLE FOR 10 BUT ONLY DELIVERING A BENEFIT FOR SIX. THAT, AGAIN, I THINK VIOLATES A BASIC PRINCIPLE OF FAIRNESS THAT MOST AMERICANS SHOULD EXPECT WHEN IT COMES TO THEIR ELECTED LEADERS MAKING PUBLIC POLICY WHICH WILL HAVE A PRO FUND IMPACT ON THEM AND THEIR LIVES. I HOPE TO GET A VOTE ON THAT AMENDMENT AND I HOPE OUR COLLEAGUES WILL SUPPORT IT. IT IS UNCONSCIONABLE THAT YOU WOULD RAISE TAXES BY BY $72 BILLION, WHICH IS WHAT THIS DOES, UNTIL THE YEAR 2014, BEFORE THE PREMIUM SUBSIDIES AND THE EXCHANGES KICK IN TO DELIVER THE BENEFITS THAT ARE SUPPOSED TO BE DELIVERED UNDER THIS BILL. THE SENATOR FROM TEXAS, I LOOK FORWARD TO GETTING A VOTE ON THAT AMENDMENT AND I HOPE WE CAN WIN ON THE CRAPO AMENDMENT LATER IN THE DAY. I APPRECIATE MY OTHER COLLEAGUES BEING HERE TO POINT OUT HOW IMPORTANT IT IS TO HAVE PUBLIC POLICY THAT IS FAIR AND ALSO THAT WE NOT DO THINGS THAT ARE COUNTERTO JOB CREATION AT A TIME WHEN WE'RE ASKING SMALL BUSINESSES TO GET OUT THERE AND CREATE JOBS AND TO MAKE INVESTMENT. A SENATOR: IT SEEMS --

    Show Full Text
  • 10:57:40 AM

    MR. BARRASSO

    FROM IDAHO HAD A PICTURE OF A WOMAN MAKING $50,000 A YEAR AND THE HEALTH…

    FROM IDAHO HAD A PICTURE OF A WOMAN MAKING $50,000 A YEAR AND THE HEALTH BENEFITS. MY CONCERN IS NOT JUST HER TAXES. MY CONCERN IS ALSO HER JOB. IT'S ALSO THE FACT THAT SHE WOULD STILL HAVE A JOB. BECAUSE WHAT I HEAR FROM THE PEOPLE OF WYOMING IS: DON'T RAISE MY TAXES. DON'T CUT MY MEDICARE. DON'T MAKE MATTERS WORSE THAN THEY ARE RIGHT NOW IN THIS ECONOMY WHERE WE HAVE 10% UNEMPLOYMENT. LIKE THE SENATOR FROM SOUTH DAKOTA, I'M A MEMBER OF THE ORGANIZATION, NATIONAL FEDERATION OF INDEPENDENT BUSINESS, MEMBER FOR YEARS. THEY'RE TELLING US THAT AS THEY COLLECT THE -- AS THESE TAXES ARE RAISED AND COLLECTED IN 2010, 2011, 2013, IN 2010, GOING TO LOSE 400,000 JOBS IN AMERICA. IN 2011 ANOTHER 400,000 AFTER THAT, AND ANOTHER 400,000 AS THE TAXES CONTINUE TO BE COLLECTED. THEY WOULD BE LOSING IN THIS COUNTRY 1.6 MILLION JOBS AS A RESULT OF THESE INCREASED TAXES THAT ALL AMERICANS ARE GOING TO HAVE TO PAY. SO I WOULD ASK THE SENATOR FROM IDAHO, ISN'T IT EVEN MORE CRITICAL THAT WE PASS YOUR AMENDMENT IN ADDITION TO THE FACT THAT WE DON'T WANT THESE TAXES, THEY'RE GOING TO HURT OUR ECONOMY ACROSS THE BOARD?

    Show Full Text
  • 10:58:54 AM

    MR. CRAPO

    FROM WYOMING IS EXACTLY RIGHT. THE WRONG THING TO DO WHEN OUR ECONOMY…

    FROM WYOMING IS EXACTLY RIGHT. THE WRONG THING TO DO WHEN OUR ECONOMY NEEDS TO BE STRENGTHEN AND RESTARTED, IF YOU WILL, IS TO APPLY A HUGE AMOUNT OF NEW TAXES. LET'S JUST TAKE THE EXAMPLE THAT WE TALKED ABOUT EARL YES. THIS YOUNG LADY -- EARLIER. THIS YOUNG LADY UNDER THE BILL IN THE SENATE NOW, WILL NOT ONLY SEE HER HEALTH BENEFITS GO DOWN, BUT THE NET VALUE OF HER COMPENSATION WILL GO DOWN. SHE WILL GET A LITTLE EXTRA WAGES IN ORDER TO OFFSET THE REDUCTION OF HER HEALTH CARE BENEFITS, BUT THOSE WILL BE TAXED AND HER NET COMPENSATION PACKAGE WILL GO DOWN. AND THE POINT HERE IS THIS, AND IT'S A LITTLE BIT IRONIC, THAT TODAY THE DEMOCRAT CAUCUS IS GOING TO BE MEETING WITH THE PRESIDENT AT THE WHITE HOUSE IN, YET, ONE MORE CLOSED-DOOR MEETING WHERE THEY'RE GOING TO BE TRYING TO REDRAFT THE BILL IN ORDER TO GET AROUND SOME OF THE PROBLEMS WHICH I HOPE THEY WILL LET THE AMERICAN PUBLIC SEE TO DEBATE BEFORE THEY TRY TO VOTE ON IT AGAIN. BUT IT'S KIND OF IRONIC THAT AS THE DEMOCRATS COME OUT OF THAT CAUCUS, IF THEY DON'T SUPPORT THIS AMENDMENT, THEY WILL BE VIOLATING TWO OF THE PRESIDENT'S PLEDGES. ONE, HIS PLEDGE, AFTER MEETING WITH HIM, THEY'LL BE VIOLATING HIS PLEDGE TO NOT TAX ANY AMERICANS WHO MAKE LESS THAN THAN $200,000, INDIVIDUAL, OR $250,000 FAMILY. ASAS WELL AS HIS PLEDGE, IF YOU LIKE IT, YOU CAN KEEP IT. THIS YOUNG LADY, IF SHE LIKES HER PACKAGE, HE DIDN'T KEEP IT. -- SHE CAN'T KEEP IT. SHE WILL NOT HAVE THAT OPTION. HER HEALTH CARE PACKAGE WILL BE REDUCED DOWN TO THE MINIMUM DESIGNED ACCEPTABLE POLICY AND PROBABLY A LITTLE MORE THAN THAT. SHE'LL SEE ABOUT A 20% OR 30% REDUCTION IN HER HEALTH CARE PACKAGE AGAINST HER WILL. AND I WOULD BE WILLING TO BET YOU THAT SHE'D PREFER TO KEEP THE ONE SHE'S GOT NOW. MOST AMERICANS DO LIKE THE INSURANCE THEY'RE GETTING THROUGH THEIR EMPLOYERS.

    Show Full Text
  • 11:00:44 AM

    MR. ENSIGN

    I WOULD LIKE TO ASK THE SENATOR FROM IDAHO A QUESTION. THESE ARE, FIRST OF…

    I WOULD LIKE TO ASK THE SENATOR FROM IDAHO A QUESTION. THESE ARE, FIRST OF ALL, THE NINE TAXES WE KNOW FOR SURE THAT ARE RAISED. THE 40% CADILLAC PLAN TAX, THE SEPARATE TAX ON INSURANCES. WE HAVE THE EMPLOYER TAX, THE DRUG TAX, THE LAB TAX, THE MEDICAL DEVICE TAX, THE FAILURE TO BUY INSURANCE TAX, THE COSMETIC SURGERY TAX AND THE INCREASED EMPLOYEE MEDICARE TAX. IN OUR STATES, PEOPLE THINK, YOU KNOW, WE'LL PASS A SALES TAX AND THE BUSINESS WILL JUST PAY THE SALES TAX. I'D LIKE TO ASK THE SENATOR: WHO ACTUALLY PAYS THE SALES TAX? AND WHO IS CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE AND THE JOINT COMMITTEE ON TAXATION, WHICH ARE BOTH NONPARTISAN, WHO HAVE THEY SAID ARE GOING TO PAY THESE TAXES?

    Show Full Text
  • 11:01:30 AM

    MR. CRAPO

    WHO SERVES ON THE FINANCE COMMITTEE WAS THERE WHEN THE JOINT TAX AND…

    WHO SERVES ON THE FINANCE COMMITTEE WAS THERE WHEN THE JOINT TAX AND SPWOEPLT EXPERTS -- AND C.B.O. EXPERTS WERE ASKED THESE QUESTIONS. THEY DIRECTLY SAID THESE FEES WILL BE PASSED ON VIRTUALLY TO THE CONSUMER WHICH MEANS TWO THINGS. FIRST OF ALL, THE ONES THAT ARE TAXES WILL BE TAXED PASSED ON TO THE CONSUMER AS SHOWN IN THE EXAMPLE OF THE YOUNG LADY THAT WE LOOKED AT HERE. THOSE ONES THAT ARE FEES WILL SIMPLY BE PASSED ON IN THE FORM OF HIGHER COSTS FOR MEDICAL SERVICES OR HIGHER PREMIUMS, WHICH IS ONE OF THE REASONS WHY CONTRARY TO THE ASSERTIONS BY THE OTHER SIDE, THIS BILL WILL DRIVE UP THE COST OF HEALTH CARE AND WILL DRIVE UP THE COST OF PREMIUMS, NOT DOWN.

    Show Full Text
  • 11:02:10 AM

    MR. ENSIGN

    I'D LIKE TO POINT OUT GOES ALONG WITH YOUR CHART OVER THERE. THIS IS WHAT…

    I'D LIKE TO POINT OUT GOES ALONG WITH YOUR CHART OVER THERE. THIS IS WHAT THE JOINT COMMITTEE ON TAXATION HAS SAID. 84% OF ALL OF THE TAXES BEING PAID IN THIS BILL ARE BEING PAID BY THOSE MAKING LESS THAN $200,000 A YEAR. IF THIS ISN'T A DIRECT VIOLATION OF THE PRESIDENT'S PROMISE NOT TO RAISE ONE DIME OF THEIR TAXES, I DON'T KNOW WHAT IS. I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW THE PRESIDENT CAN SIGN THIS BILL AND KEEP TO THE PROMISE THAT HE MADE DURING THE CAMPAIGN.

    Show Full Text
  • 11:02:41 AM

    MR. CRAPO

    I AGREE WITH THE SENATOR FROM NEVADA, AND IT'S DISTURBING, FRANKLY, TO SEE…

    I AGREE WITH THE SENATOR FROM NEVADA, AND IT'S DISTURBING, FRANKLY, TO SEE THE RESPONSES. FIRST, THE RESPONSE THAT THIS BILL ACTUALLY DOESN'T INCREASE TAXES. IT CUTS TAXES. WELL, THAT FLIES RIGHT IN THE FACE OF THE VERY REPORTS AND ANALYSIS BY JOINT TAX AND C.B.O. I, AGAIN, ENCOURAGE EVERYBODY IN AMERICA TO READ THIS BILL. IT'S AVAILABLE ON MY WEB SITE, ON THE REPUBLICAN WEB SITE, ON THE C-SPAN WEB SITE AND A NUMBER OF OTHERS. IN FACT, WE'RE GOING TO PUT UP A REFERENCE TO WHERE YOU CAN FIND THE BILL TO READ IT IF YOU WANT TO TRY TO PARSE THROUGH WHO'S REALLY TELLING THE TRUTH HERE. BUT THE BOTTOM LINE IS THIS BILL INCREASES TAXES BY IN THE FIRST TEN YEARS $493 BILLION. WHEN YOU ADD FEES TO THAT, IT'S MORE LIKE $700 BILLION. IF YOU COUNT THE FIRST TEN YEARS OF IMPLEMENTATION IT'S OVER $1 TRILLION OF NEW TAXES. FOR THOSE WHO ARE NOT ABLE TO PURCHASE HEALTH INSURANCE, TAX CUTS, EVEN THOUGH THREE-FOURTHS OF THEM GO TO THEM WHO ARE NOT AT THIS POINT AT A LEVEL WHERE THEY ARE INCURRING A TAX LIABILITY.

    Show Full Text
  • 11:03:52 AM

    MR. THUNE

    IS TOO, MAYBE YOU CAN CORRECT THIS, THOSE PREMIUM TAX CREDITS ACTUALLY GO…

    IS TOO, MAYBE YOU CAN CORRECT THIS, THOSE PREMIUM TAX CREDITS ACTUALLY GO TO THE TAXPAYER? WHEN THEY TALK ABOUT THIS IS A TAX CUT FOR PEOPLE, DOES IT END UP IN THE POCKET OF THE AVERAGE TAXPAYER IN THIS COUNTRY?

    Show Full Text
  • 11:04:09 AM

    MR. CRAPO

    FROM SOUTH DAKOTA IS CORRECT. THIS SUBSIDY IS NOT PAID TO THE INDIVIDUAL.…

    FROM SOUTH DAKOTA IS CORRECT. THIS SUBSIDY IS NOT PAID TO THE INDIVIDUAL. IT'S PAID DIRECTLY TO THE INSURANCE COMPANY. OF THE ONE-QUARTER OF PEOPLE RECEIVING THIS SUBSIDY WHO DO ACTUALLY PAY INCOME TAXES, THEIR INCOME TAXES WILL IN FACT STAY THE SAME. THEY ARE NOT ACTUALLY GETTING A TAX CUT. WHAT THEY ARE GETTING IS A SUBSIDY FOR THE PURCHASE OF INSURANCE THAT IS MANAGED THROUGH THE TAX CODE BUT IS PAID DIRECTLY TO THE INSURANCE COMPANY.

    Show Full Text
  • 11:04:40 AM

    MR. THUNE

    IT'S ACTUALLY 7%.

  • 11:05:26 AM

    MR. CRAPO

    ACTUALLY 7%.

  • 11:05:27 AM

    MR. THUNE

    THE SENATOR FROM IDAHO HAS CONSUMED 35 MINUTES.

  • 11:06:41 AM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THE SENATOR FROM IDAHO HAS CONSUMED 35 MINUTES.

  • 11:06:44 AM

    MR. CRAPO

    THANK YOU.

  • 11:06:45 AM

    MR. ALEXANDER

    AGREE WITH THE SENATOR FROM SOUTH DAKOTA. THIS IS PEOPLE WHO MIGHT BE…

    AGREE WITH THE SENATOR FROM SOUTH DAKOTA. THIS IS PEOPLE WHO MIGHT BE WATCHING THIS MUST BE THINKING, WAIT A MINUTE HERE, AND LET ME JUST ASK THE TWO MEMBERS OF THE FINANCE COMMITTEE, I MEAN, ISN'T IT TRUE -- WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO SAY IS THAT A MEDICARE CUT IS NOT A MEDICARE CUT AND THAT A TAX INCREASE IS NOT A TAX INCREASE AND THAT A PREMIUM INCREASE IS NOT A PREMIUM INCREASE. I MEAN, ISN'T IT TRUE THAT WHEN THE BILL IS FULLY IMPLEMENTED THERE WILL BE NEARLY $1 TRILLION IN MEDICARE CUTS? AND ISN'T IT TRUE THAT THERE WILL BE NEARLY ABOUT $1 TRILLION WHEN FULLY IMPLEMENTED IN NEW TAXES? ISN'T IT TRUE THAT THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE HAS SAID THAT'S ALL GOING TO BE PASSED ON TO PEOPLE? AND ISN'T IT TRUE THAT THAT ALL STARTS IN JANUARY IF THE BILL PASSES? AND ISN'T IT ALSO TRUE THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE HAS SAID THAT PREMIUMS ARE GOING TO CONTINUE TO GO UP, AND FOR PEOPLE, THE INDIVIDUAL MARKET THEY'RE GOING TO GO UP EVEN MORE? ISN'T THAT ALL TRUE?

    Show Full Text
  • 11:07:42 AM

    MR. CRAPO

    RESPOND FIRST. THE SENATOR FROM TENNESSEE IS EXACTLY RIGHT. IN THIS CHART,…

    RESPOND FIRST. THE SENATOR FROM TENNESSEE IS EXACTLY RIGHT. IN THIS CHART, THESE ARE THE TAX INCREASES FOR THE FIRST TEN YEARS OF THE BILL. THIS CHART INCLUDES THE FEES AND PENALTIES THAT ARE CHARGED AS WELL. THE TOTAL THERE IS $704 BILLION. IF YOU ACTUALLY START WHEN THE BILL TOTALLY BECOMES IMPLEMENTED OR STARTING TO BE IMPLEMENTED IN 2014 TO COMPARE TAXES TO SPENDING, THE ACTUAL TAXES AND FEES THAT ARE GOING TO BE COLLECTED ARE $1.3 TRILLION ALMOST.

    Show Full Text
  • 11:08:13 AM

    MR. ENSIGN

    NO QUESTION I COULD ANSWER YOUR QUESTION BY TRUE, TRUE, TRUE, TRUE, TRUE,…

    NO QUESTION I COULD ANSWER YOUR QUESTION BY TRUE, TRUE, TRUE, TRUE, TRUE, TRUE. YOU KNOW, THE OLD SAYING IF IT WALKS LIKE A DUCK AND IT KWAUBGS LIKE A DUCK, IT'S A DUCK. THESE TAXES, STAOEUPLGS -- SOMETIMES THEY'RE CALLED FEES. THE SUPREME COURT HAS ACTUALLY RULED THAT A FEE THAT ACTS LIKE A TAX IS IN FACT A TAX. THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT MOST OF THESE PROVISIONS THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT BEFORE, WE CALL THEM A TAX BECAUSE THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT THEY ARE. THESE NINE NEW TAXES ARE REALLY A TAX. AND YOU'RE EXACTLY RIGHT, THE JOINT COMMITTEE ON TAXATION AND CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE HAVE SAID THESE ARE GOING TO BE PASSED ON TO THE CONSUMER. AND WHAT THEY HAVE ALSO SAID -- AND I THOUGHT THIS WAS VERY SIGNIFICANT -- 84% OF ALL OF THESE TAXES ARE GOING TO BE PASSED ON TO PEOPLE WHO MAKE LESS THAN $200,000 A YEAR. AND THAT'S, I THINK, WHAT WE'VE ALL BEEN SAYING IS THE OTHER SIDE SAID, NO, WE'RE GOING TO TAX THE RICH FOR THIS. WHEN 84% OF THAT TAX BURDEN IS PAID BY PEOPLE MAKING LESS THAN $200,000 AND THE VAST MAJORITY IS ALSO PAID BY PEOPLE MAKING LESS THAN $100,000, THE VAST MAJORITY IS BEING PAID BY PEOPLE LESS THAN $100,000 A YEAR. THE SAME WITH SALES TAX. SALES TAXES, IT'S BEEN CALLED A REGRESSIVE TAX. THESE ARE REGRESSIVE TAXES THAT THE DEMOCRATS ARE PASSING ON TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.

    Show Full Text
  • 11:09:41 AM

    MR. CRAPO

    MR. PRESIDENT, TO CONCLUDE, I'D LIKE TO THANK MY COLLEAGUES FOR COMING…

    MR. PRESIDENT, TO CONCLUDE, I'D LIKE TO THANK MY COLLEAGUES FOR COMING OVER AND SPEAKING TODAY AND DISCUSSING THIS ISSUE WITH ME. I'D LIKE TO CONCLUDE BY POINTING OUT ONCE AGAIN THE PRESIDENT SAID HE CAN MAKE A FIRM PLEDGE, NO FAMILY MAKING LESS THAN $250,000 WILL SEE THEIR TAXES INCREASE. NOT YOUR INCOME TAXES, NOT YOUR PAYROLL TAXES, NOT YOUR CAPITAL GAINS TAXES, NOT ANY OF YOUR TAXES. YOU WILL NOT SEE ANY OF YOUR TAXES INCREASE ONE SINGLE DIME. BUT THERE ARE HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS OF TAX INCREASES IN THIS BILL THAT ARE GOING TO FALL SQUARELY ON THE BACKS OF THE MIDDLE CLASS. OUR MOTION SIMPLY SAYS LET'S FIX THAT AND TAKE IT OUFPLT THE BOTTOM LINE IS THOSE WHO ARE SAYING THAT IS NOT THE CASE IN THE FIRST PLACE ARE SAYING THERE ARE SUBSIDIES IN THE BILL THAT ALMOST EQUALS THE AMOUNT OF THESE TAXES AND, THEREFORE, IT IS REALLY A NET TAX CUT. FIRST OF ALL, SUBSIDIES ARE NOT TAX CUTS. THREE-QUARTERS OF THEM GO TO INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE NO TAX LIABILITY. AND THE OTHER ONE-QUARTER DOES NOT REDUCE THE TAX LIABILITY ON THE INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE GETTING THE INSURANCE SUBSIDY. EVEN IF YOU ACCEPT ALL OF THAT KIND OF ARGUMENT, THE PRESIDENT WAS NOT SAYING YOU WILL NOT SEE NET TAXES GO UP IN AMERICA. THE PRESIDENT WAS NOT SAYING WE WILL NOT CUT, OR NOT INCREASE YOUR TAXES BY MORE THAN WE WILL CUT SOMEONE ELSE'S TAXES. I DON'T THINK ANYBODY EXPECTED THAT WAS WHAT HE WAS SAYING. THE PRESIDENT WAS SAYING THAT HE WOULD NOT RAISE TAXES IN THIS BILL. AND THIS BILL VIOLATES THAT PLEDGE. THEREFORE, WE SHOULD SUPPORT THE MOTION TO SEND THIS BILL BACK TO THE FINANCE COMMITTEE TO FIX THAT GLARING PROBLEM. WITH THAT, MR. PRESIDENT, I RESERVE THE BALANCE OF MY TIME.

    Show Full Text
  • 11:11:54 AM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THE SENATOR FROM WYOMING.

  • 11:11:58 AM

    MR. ENZI

    THE ABSENCE OF A QUORUM AND ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT THE TIME BE DIVIDED…

    THE ABSENCE OF A QUORUM AND ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT THE TIME BE DIVIDED EQUALLY.

    Show Full Text
  • 11:12:02 AM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    WITHOUT OBJECTION. THE CLERK WILL CALL THE ROLL. QUORUM CALL:

  • 11:13:02 AM

    MR. DURBIN

  • 11:13:03 AM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THE SENATOR FROM ILLINOIS.

  • 11:13:05 AM

    MR. DURBIN

    WITHOUT OBJECTION.

  • 11:13:07 AM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    WITHOUT OBJECTION.

  • 11:13:09 AM

    MR. DURBIN

    SPEAK ON THE TIME ALLOTTED TO THE CHAIRMAN OF THE FINANCE COMMITTEE…

    SPEAK ON THE TIME ALLOTTED TO THE CHAIRMAN OF THE FINANCE COMMITTEE RELATIVE TO HIS AMENDMENT.

    Show Full Text
  • 11:13:14 AM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THE SENATOR IS RECOGNIZED.

  • 11:13:17 AM

    MR. DURBIN

    THE SENATOR FROM DELAWARE.

  • 11:21:14 AM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    OFFICER: THE SENATOR FROM DELAWARE.

  • 11:21:16 AM

    MR. KAUFMAN

    PRESIDENT, I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO SPEAK UNDER THE CONTROL OF THE -- A…

    PRESIDENT, I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO SPEAK UNDER THE CONTROL OF THE -- A SENATOR: LET ME FOLLOWUP ON SOME OF THE COMMENTS OF OUR COLLEAGUE FROM ILLINOIS. I'M ALWAYS STRUCK WHEN BACK HOME I ADDRESSED THE HOMEBUILDERS IN OUR STATE.

    Show Full Text
  • 11:21:42 AM

    MR. CARPER

    THE SENATOR FROM NEW HAMPSHIRE.

  • 11:36:43 AM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    OFFICER: THE SENATOR FROM NEW HAMPSHIRE.

  • 11:36:45 AM

    MR. GREGG

    WITHOUT OBJECTION.

  • 11:36:53 AM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    WITHOUT OBJECTION.

  • 11:36:55 AM

    MR. GREGG

    I WANTED TO SPEAK A LITTLE BIT TODAY ABOUT THIS ISSUE OF THE TAX BURDEN…

    I WANTED TO SPEAK A LITTLE BIT TODAY ABOUT THIS ISSUE OF THE TAX BURDEN THAT THE REID BILL IS PUTTING ON PEOPLE WITH INCOMES UNDER $250,000, $200,000. WE ALL KNOW THE PRESIDENT SAID THAT HE WAS NOT GOING TO HALL HROU TAXES TO INCREASE -- GOING TO ALLOW TAXES TO INCREASE FOR PEOPLE WHO HAD INCOME UNDER THOSE NUMBERS. WE KNOW THERE ARE ALL SORTS OF PROPOSALS IN THE REID BILL WHICH SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASE TAXES. WE ALSO KNOW THERE ARE A LOT OF PROPOSALS IN THE REID BILL THAT SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASE FEES. AND WE ALSO KNOW THAT THERE ARE A LOT OF PROPOSALS IN THE REID BILL WHICH SIGNIFICANTLY, WELL SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASE PREMIUMS, WHICH, ALL OF WHICH PEOPLE UNDER $200,000 PAY. AND WHY IS THIS? WELL, PRIMARILY IT'S BECAUSE IF YOU LOOK AT THE REID BILL, IT EXPONENTIALLY INCREASES SPENDING AND GROWS THE SIZE OF GOVERNMENT. GOVERNMENT IS INCREASED BY $2.5 TRILLION UNDER THE REID BILL WHEN IT'S FULLY PHASED IN. $2.5 TRILLION. IT GOES FROM 20% OF OUR GROSS NATIONAL PRODUCT -- THAT'S WHAT GOVERNMENT TAKES OUT TODAY IN SPENDING -- UP TO ABOUT $24% OF OUR GROSS NATIONAL PRODUCT. HUGE INCREASE IN THE SIZE OF GOVERNMENT. WHEN SPENDING INCREASES LIKE THIS, AT THIS TYPE OF EXPLOSIVE RATE, THERE ARE A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT OCCUR. AND ONE OF THEM THAT OCCURS IS THAT TAXES ALSO GO UP. IT'S JUST, IT'S LIKE DAY FOLLOWING NIGHT. IF YOU'RE GOING TO INCREASE THE SIZE OF THE GOVERNMENT AT THIS RATE, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASE TAXES WHETHER YOU CALL THEM FEES OR WHETHER YOU CALL THEM PREMIUM INCREASES OR WHETHER YOU CALL THEM OUTRIGHT TAXES. AND THAT'S WHAT'S HAPPENING HERE. BECAUSE THE GOAL IS TO GROW THE GOVERNMENT DRAMATICALLY. THAT'S THE GOAL. AND WHEN YOU GROWTH GOVERNMENT, YOU INEVITABLY INCREASE THE TAXES. AND IN FACT, IN THIS BILL, IT IS ESTIMATED WHEN IT'S FULLY PUT INTO PHRAEURBGS THAT THERE WILL BE ABOUT $1.6 TRILLION OR $1.7 TRILLION OF NEW TAXES. THERE IS ALSO WHEN IT'S FULLY PHASED IN ABOUT $1 TRILLION IN REDUCTION IN MEDICARE SPENDING. WE'VE HAD A LOST DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT HERE ON THE FLOOR. I'VE BEEN HERE A NUMBER OF TIMES TALKING ABOUT THAT. BUT THE BURDEN OF TAXATION GOES UP IN ORDER TO ALLEGEDLY PAY FOR THESE NEW ENTITLEMENTS. NOW, WHY DO THE TAXES HAVE TO GO UP? WHEN YOU INCREASE SPENDING THIS WAY, YOU'VE GOT TO PAY FOR IT. OR YOU SHOULD PAY FOR IT. AND SO, THIS BILL ATTEMPTS TO DO THAT BY RAISING TAXES DRAMATICALLY. BUT THE PRESENTATION THAT YOU CAN GET ALL THIS TAX REVENUE OUT OF PEOPLE MAKING MORE THAN $200,000 A YEAR SIMPLY DOESN'T FLY. IT DOESN'T PASS THE COMMON SENSE TEST. WE HEARD FOR A WEEK FROM THE OTHER SIDE OF THE AISLE THAT NO MEDICARE BENEFIT CUTS WOULD OCCUR WITH $1 TRILLION OF MEDICARE CUTS. WELL OF COURSE THAT'S NOT TRUE. WHEN YOU -- WE JUST HEARD YESTERDAY FROM THE ACTUARY -- THE PRESIDENT'S ACTUARY, BY THE WAY, THE ACTUARY OF C.M.S., THAT WHEN YOU MAKE THESE SIGNIFICANT REDUCTIONS IN PROVIDER PAYMENTS UNDER MEDICARE, WHICH IS WHERE MUCH OF THE SAVINGS OCCURS, THAT MEANS THERE ARE FEWER PROVIDERS WHO ARE GOING TO BE ABLE TO BE PROFITABLE. IN FACT, 20% OF THE PROVIDERS WERE BEYOND PROFITABLE UNDER THIS REID BILL AS SCORED BY THE ACTUARY FOR C.M.S. AND AS A RESULT, PROVIDERS WILL DROP OUT OF THE SYSTEM. AND CLEARLY THAT WILL AFFECT BENEFITS TO SENIORS BECAUSE THEY WON'T BE ABLE TO SEE PROVIDERS BECAUSE THEY WON'T EXIST ANYMORE. IT'S LIKE TELLING SOMEBODY, SOMEONE SAID -- THE SENATOR FROM NEBRASKA, I THINK, SAID YOU CAN HAVE KEYS TO THE CAR, BUT THERE IS NO CAR. IN THIS INSTANCE THERE WOULD BE NO PROVIDERS OR FEWER PROVIDERS. WELL, ALONG WITH THAT PROBLEM, THERE'S THIS CLAIM -- ALONG WITH THAT CLAIM THAT WAS TOTALLY INACCURATE WHICH IS THAT MEDICARE BENEFITS WOULD NOT BE CUT, THERE IS THIS CLAIM THESE NEW REVENUES TO PAY FOR THIS MASSIVE EXPANSION IN SPENDING ARE GOING TO COME FROM JUST THE WEALTH KWRAOEFPLT AGAIN WE HAVE -- WEALTHY. AGAIN WE HAVE INDEPENDENT SOURCES TAKING A LOOK AT THIS, IN THIS CASE THE JOINT TAX COMMITTEE, AND THEY'VE CONCLUDED THAT IS NOT THE CASE. THE ARGUMENT FROM THE OTHER SIDE OF THE AISLE IS THAT WE'VE GOT ALL THESE TAX CREDITS IN HERE WHICH WHEN YOU BALANCE THEM OUT AGAINST THE TAX INCREASES, PEOPLE UNDER $200,000 BECAUSE SOME WILL GET TAX CREDITS, SOME WILL GET TAX INCREASES, BUT THEY BALANCE OUT SO THAT THERE'S VIRTUAL EVENNESS, SO THAT THE TAX CREDITS IN THE BILL TO SUBSIDIZE PEOPLE WHO DON'T HAVE INSURANCE TODAY MOSTLY ARE BALANCED BY THE TAX INCREASES ON PEOPLE UNDER $200,000. BECAUSE IF YOU'RE ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE UNDER $200,000 THAT DOESN'T GET THE TAX CREDIT, THAT DOESN'T MEAN A WHOLE LOT. YOUR TAXES ARE GOING UP. MORE IMPORTANTLY, JOINT TAX HAS TAKEN A LOOK AT THIS AND BY OUR ESTIMATE WHAT JOINT TAXES HAS SAID IS ESSENTIALLY THIS: 73 MILLION FAMILIES, OR ABOUT 43% OF ALL RETURNS UNDER THE NUMBER OF $200,000 -- PEOPLE WITH INCOMES UNDER $200,000 -- WILL IN 2019 HAVE THEIR TAXES GO UP. SO THERE IS A TAX INCREASE IN THIS BILL, AND IT'S VERY SIGNIFICANT ON PEOPLE UNDER $200,000. IN FACT, IF YOU COMPARE THAT TO THOSE PEOPLE WHO WILL BENEFIT FROM THE TAX CREDIT, WHAT IT AMOUNTS TO IS THAT FOR EVERY ONE PERSON WHO IS GOING TO BENEFIT FROM THE TAX CREDIT, THREE PEOPLE UNDER THE INCOME OF $200,000 WILL SEE THEIR TAXES GO UP. AND THAT'S A REAL PROBLEM. FIRST BECAUSE IT SIGNIFICANTLY VIOLATES THE PLEDGE OF THE PRESIDENT WHEN HE SAID "I CAN MAKE A FIRM PLEDGE NO FAMILY MAKING LESS THAN $250,000 WILL SEE THEIR TAXES INCREASE. NOT YOUR INCOME TAXES, NOT YOUR PAYROLL TAXES, NOT YOUR CAPITAL GAIN TAXES. NOT ANY OF YOUR TAXES." THAT'S WHAT THE PRESIDENT SAID. WELL, THAT PLEDGE IS VIOLATED BY THE REID BILL, VIOLATED VERY FUNDAMENTALLY FOR THE 73 MILLION PEOPLE WHOSE INCOMES ARE UNDER $200,000 AND WHOSE TAXES GO UP. AND SO, IT CLEARLY ISN'T A TAX-NEUTRAL EVENT FOR MIDDLE-INCOME PAOEFPLT IT IS A TAX -- FOR MIDDLE-INCOME PEOPLE. IT IS A TAX INCREASE EVENT FOR A LARGE NUMBER OF MIDDLE-INCOME PEOPLE. 43% OF ALL PEOPLE PAYING TAXES WHOSE INCOME IS UNDER $200,000 WILL HAVE THEIR TAXES INCREASED. AND WHAT'S THE THOUGHT PROCESS BEHIND THIS? WELL, THE THOUGHT PROCESS ESSENTIALLY SEEMS TO BE THAT WE'RE GOING TO EXPLODE THE SIZE OF GOVERNMENT. WE'RE GOING TO DRAMATICALLY INCREASE THE TAXES ON THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. SHAOUPBD THAT'S GOING TO -- AND SOMEHOW THAT'S GOING TO MAKE LIFE BETTER FOR AMERICANS. I DON'T SEE THAT HAPPENING. I DON'T SEE THAT HAPPENING. I MEAN, WE KNOW FROM OUR EXPERIENCE AS A GOVERNMENT THAT GROWING THE GOVERNMENT IN THIS EXPONENTIAL WAY PROBABLY IS GOING TO LEAD TO PEOPLE HAVING A TOUGHER TIME MAKING ENDS MEET BECAUSE THEIR TAX BURDEN'S GOING TO GO UP. DISCRETIONARY DOLLARS THAT THEY MIGHT HAVE USED TO SEND THEIR KIDS TO COLLEGE. OR THEY MIGHT HAVE USED TO BUY A NEW HOUSE OR THEY MIGHT HAVE USED TO BUY A NEW CAR, OR THEY MIGHT HAVE JUST SIMPLY SAVED, THOSE DISCRETIONARY DOLLARS, THEY DON'T HAVE THEM ANYMORE BECAUSE THEY COME TO THE GOVERNMENT TO FUND THIS MASSIVE EXPLOSION IN PROGRAM AND THIS INCREASE IN THE SIZE OF GOVERNMENT. I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO LOOKING TO TOO FAR TO SEE HOW THIS MODEL DOESN'T WORK. ALL WE HAVE TO DO IS LOOK AT OUR EUROPEAN NEIGHBORS. THIS IDEA THAT YOU CAN EUROPEANIZE THE ECONOMY. THAT, SOMEHOW, IF YOU GROW THE GOVERNMENT, YOU CAN CREATE PROSPERITY. THAT'S WHAT'S BASICALLY BEHIND THE GOVERNMENT. WE KNOW THAT DOESN'T WORK. ALL WE HAVE TO DO IS LOOK AT OUR NEIGHBORS IN EUROPE WHO HAVE USED THAT MODEL TO FIND OUT AN CONCLUDE THAT THAT DOESN'T WORK. IT WOULD MAKE MUCH MORE SENSE TO PUT IN PLACE AN AFFORDABLE PLAN, ONE WHICH DIDN'T RAISE THE TAXES OF 73% OF THE PEOPLE WHO FILE INCOME -- OR 73 MILLION PEOPLE WHO FILE INCOME TAXES UNDER THE INCOME OF $200,000, 43% OF THE PEOPLE PAYING TAXES T>u THIS EXTRAORDINARY WAY THAT WE KNOW WE CAN'T AFFORD AND THAT WE KNOW WE END UP PASSING ON OUR TO KIDS, A COUNTRY WHICH IS -- HAS LESS OF A STANDARD OF LIVING THAN THEY RECEIVE FROM THEIR PARENTS. SO I HOPE WE TAKE ANOTHER LOOK AT ALL THE TAXES IN THIS BILL. RECOGNIZE THAT THE COMMITMENT THAT THE PRESIDENT MADE ON THE ISSUE OF TAXES IS NOT BEING FULFILLED BY THIS BILL AND GO BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD AND REORGANIZE IT. SO THAT WE COME CLOSER TO WHAT THE PRESIDENT WANTED, WHICH WAS A BILL THAT DIDN'T RAISE TAXES, WHICH WAS A BILL THAT DID INSURE EVERYONE, WHICH WAS A BILL THAT DID CREATE AN ATMOSPHERE WHERE IF YOU WANTED TO KEEP YOUR PRESENT INSURANCE, YOU COULD KEEP IT AND WHICH IS A BILL THAT TURNS THE COST CURVE OF HEALTH CARE DOWN. NONE OF THOSE FOUR GOALS ARE NOW MET. ACCORDING TO THE ACTUARY AND TO JOINT TAX, ALL OF THOSE FOUR GOALS, JUST THE OPPOSITE OCCURS. THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE INSURED REMAINS AT 24 MILLION PEOPLE, THE COSTS GO UP BY $235 BILLION. TADGESS -- TAXES GO UP FOR 73 MILLION PEOPLE AND WE END UP WITH 17 MILLION PEOPLE WHO HAVE INSURANCE TODAY IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR LOSING THAT INSURANCE. SO I BELIEVE WE SHOULD TAKE ANOTHER -- ANOTHER LOOK AT THIS BILL AND TRY TO DO A BETTER JOB. AT THIS POINT I YIELD THE FLOOR. A SENATOR: MR. PRESIDENT?

    Show Full Text
  • 11:47:41 AM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    OFFICER: THE SENATOR FROM ALABAMA. A SENATOR: MR. PRESIDENT, I RISE TODAY…

    OFFICER: THE SENATOR FROM ALABAMA. A SENATOR: MR. PRESIDENT, I RISE TODAY IN DISBELIEF --

    Show Full Text
  • 11:47:50 AM

    MR. SHELBY

    THE SENATOR FROM ALABAMA.

  • 11:47:57 AM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THE SENATOR FROM ALABAMA.

  • 11:48:02 AM

    MR. SHELBY

    MR. PRESIDENT?

  • 12:03:51 PM

    MR. DORGAN

    PRESIDENT?

  • 12:03:52 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THE SENATOR FROM NORTH DAKOTA.

  • 12:03:54 PM

    MR. DORGAN

    I HAVE SIX UNANIMOUS CONSENT REQUESTS FOR COMMITTEES TO MEET TODAY. THEY…

    I HAVE SIX UNANIMOUS CONSENT REQUESTS FOR COMMITTEES TO MEET TODAY. THEY HAVE THE CONSENT OF THE MINORITY AND MAJORITY LEADERS. I ASK THAT THESE BE AGREED TO.

    Show Full Text
  • 12:04:05 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    WITHOUT OBJECTION.

  • 12:04:07 PM

    MR. DORGAN

    MR. PRESIDENT, I YIELD MYSELF SUCH TIME AS I MAY CONSUME UNDER THE HOUR…

    MR. PRESIDENT, I YIELD MYSELF SUCH TIME AS I MAY CONSUME UNDER THE HOUR THAT I CONTROL. MR. PRESIDENT, WE'LL HAVE PEOPLE TROTTING ONTO THE FLOOR OF THE SENATE THIS AFTERNOON AND SOME HAVE THIS MORNING TALKING ABOUT THIS ISSUE OF PRESCRIPTION DRUG REIMPORTATION AND SAYING THERE ARE SAFETY PROBLEMS WITH IT, SAFETY PROBLEMS. LET ME TALK ABOUT ONE SMALL PIECE OF HEALTH CARE REFORM WITHOUT WHICH YOU CAN'T CALL IT HEALTH CARE REFORM BECAUSE AT LEAST WITH RESPECT TO THE ISSUE OF PRICING OF PRESCRIPTION DRUGS, THERE WILL BE NO REFORM UNLESS MY AMENDMENT IS PASSED. MY AMENDMENT IS BIPARTISAN. IT INCLUDES SUPPORT FROM SENATOR SNOWE, SENATOR McCAIN, SENATOR GRASSLEY ON THAT SIDE, MANY DEMOCRATIC SENATORS AS WELL, AND IT SAYS LET'S PUT THE BRAKES ON THESE UNBELIEVABLE INCREASES IN THE PRICE OF PRESCRIPTION DRUGS. 9% INCREASE THIS YEAR ALONE IN BRAND NAME PRESCRIPTION DRUGS. NOW, WHY IS THIS AN IMPORTANT ISSUE? HOW ABOUT LET'S TALK ABOUT THE PRICE OF NEXIUM. THE PRICE OF NEXIUM. YOU BUY IT -- IF YOU NEED IT -- IT -- $424 FOR AN EQUIVALENT QUANTITY IN THE UNITED STATES. IF YOU WANT TO BUY IT ELSEWHERE, NOT $424. PAY $37 IN GERMANY. $36 IN SPAIN. $41 IN GREAT BRITAIN. WE ARE CHARGED THE HIGHEST PRICES IN THE WORLD FOR PRESCRIPTION DRUGS. NOW, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE COME OUT HERE AND SAY WELL, THERE WILL BE SAFETY IF WE REIMPORT F.D.A.-APPROVED DRUGS FROM OTHER COUNTRIES. JUST ABSOLUTE RUBBISH. HERE IS DR. ROST, A FORMER VICE PRESIDENT FOR MARKETING FOR PFIZER CORPORATION. HERE'S WHAT HE SAID. "DURING MY TIME, I WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR A REGION IN NORTHERN EUROPE, I NEVER ONCE, NOT ONCE, HEARD THE DRUG INDUSTRY, REGULATORY AGENCIES, THE GOVERNMENT, OR ANYONE ELSE SAYING THAT THIS PRACTICE IN EUROPE WAS UNSAFE. AND PERSONALLY, I THINK IT'S OUTRIGHT DEROGATORY TO CLAIM THAT THE AMERICANS WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO HANDLE REIMPORTATION OF DRUGS WHEN THE REST OF THE EDUCATED WORLD CAN DO IT." THEY HAVE BEEN DOING THIS IN EUROPE FOR 20 YEARS, TO REIMPORT LOWER PRICED PRESCRIPTION DRUGS FROM OTHER COUNTRIES, AND THEY DO IT SAFELY. OUR CONSUMERS PAY THE HIGHEST PRICES IN THE WORLD BECAUSE THERE'S NO COMPETITION FOR PRESCRIPTION DRUGS. WHEN A DRUG IS SOLD FOR A FRACTION OF THE PRICE ELSEWHERE, 1/10 THE PRICE FOR NEXIUM IN GERMANY AND GREAT BRITAIN, THE AMERICAN PEOPLE CAN'T ACCESS IT EVEN THOUGH IT'S MADE IN THE SAME PLANT, SAME PILL, PUT IN THE SAME BOTTLE, THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE TOLD IT'S OFF-LIMITS TO YOU. DR. ROST ALSO SAID THIS -- "RIGHT NOW, DRUG COMPANIES ARE TESTIFYING THAT IMPORTED DRUGS ARE UNSAFE. NOTHING COULD BE FURTHER FROM THE TRUTH." THIS FROM A FORMER EXECUTIVE OF PFIZER CORPORATION. NOW, WHEN THE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY GOES AROUND THE HILL TODAY AND TELLS YOU THAT IMPORTING MEDICINE IS GOING TO BE UNSAFE -- AND BY THE WAY, OUR BILL ONLY ALLOWS THE IMPORTATION FROM AUSTRALIA, NEW ZEALAND, JAPAN, AND THE EUROPEAN COMPANIES WHERE THEY HAVE AN IDENTICAL CHAIN OF CUD AND WHERE WE REQUIRE PEDIGREE AND BATCH LOTS THAT WILL MAKE THE ENTIRE DRUG SUPPLY MUCH, MUCH SAFER, INCLUDING THE DOMESTIC DRUG SUPPLY. WHEN THE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY GOES AROUND THE HILL TODAY SAYING IF YOU VOTE FOR THE DORGAN-SNOWE-McCAIN ET AL AMENDMENT, YOU'RE VOTING FOR LESS SAFETY. ASK THE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY THIS. WHAT ABOUT THE FACT THAT YOU GET 40% OF YOUR ACTIVE INGREDIENTS FROM DRUGS FROM INDIA AND CHINA AND FROM PLACES IN INDIA AND CHINA IN MANY CIRCUMSTANCES THAT HAVE NEVER BEEN INVESTIGATED OR INSPECTED BY ANYONE? ANSWER THAT. AND THEN TELL US THAT REIMPORTING F.D.A.-APPROVED PRESCRIPTION DRUGS FROM OTHER COUNTRIES IS UNSAFE. WHAT A BUNCH OF RUBBISH. NOW, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT SOMETIME YESTERDAY, MAYBE LATE LAST NIGHT, SOMEBODY MADE A DEAL. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE DEAL IS, BUT I GUESS THE DEAL IS TO SAY THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THIS AMENDMENT. IT'S BEEN SEVEN DAYS SINCE WE STARTED DEBATING THIS AMENDMENT. WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THIS AMENDMENT VOTE. THEN WE'RE GOING TO HAVE ANOTHER VOTE ON ANOTHER AMENDMENT THAT NULLIFIES IT. IT'S THE AMENDMENT THAT I CALL I STAND UP FOR THE AMERICAN PEOPLE PAYING THE HIGHEST PRICES IN THE WORLD FOR PRESCRIPTION DRUGS. DO YOU WANT TO SUPPORT THAT AMENDMENT? GO RIGHT AHEAD. WHAT YOU'RE DOING IS NULLIFYING ANY ABILITY OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE TO HAVE THE FREEDOM TO ACCESS LOWER PRICED DRUGS WHERE THEY ARE SOLD ELSEWHERE IN THE WORLD. I'M TALKING ABOUT F.D.A.-APPROVED DRUGS MADE IN F.D.A.-APPROVED PLANTS. IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT THE FANCY WRAPPING AND THE BRIGHT RIBBONS ARE IN THIS PACKAGE. THIS PACKAGE WOULD NULLIFY WHAT WE'RE -- TO NULLIFY WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS A PACKAGE THAT COMES DIRECTLY FROM THE PERMANENT INDUSTRY. WHY? TO PROTECT THEIR INTERESTS. THIS YEAR, THEY WILL SELL SELL $290 BILLION WORTH OF DRUGS. 80% BRAND NAME PRESCRIPTION DRUGS. AND ON BRAND NAME DRUGS, THE PRICE INCREASED 9% THIS YEAR AND ON GENERIC DRUGS, IT FELL BY 9%. NOW I UNDERSTAND WHY THEY WANT TO PROTECT THOSE INTERESTS. HERE ARE TWO PILL BOTTLES. BOTH CONTAIN LIPITOR. BOTH MADE IN A PLANT IN IRELAND BY AN AMERICAN CORPORATION. THIS SENT TO CANADA, THIS SENT TO THE UNITED STATES. THE AMERICAN CONSUMER GETS THE SAME PILL MADE IN THE SAME BOTTLE, MADE IN THE SAME PLANT BY THE SAME COMPANY. THE AMERICAN CONSUMER ALSO GETS THE PRIVILEGE OF PAYING NEARLY TRIPLE THE PRICE AND CAN'T DO A THING ABOUT IT BECAUSE THIS CONGRESS VOTE AFTER VOTE AFTER VOTE HAS SAID WE STAND WITH THE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY AND AGAINST COMPETITION AND AGAINST FREEDOM FOR THE AMERICAN WORKER. AND IF I SOUND A BIT SICK AND TIRED OF IT, I AM. WE HAVE BEEN GOING AFTER THIS FOR EIGHT TO TEN YEARS TO GIVE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE THE FREEDOM TO ACCESS THE IDENTICAL F.D.A.-APPROVED DRUGS FOR A FRACTION OF THE PRICE WHERE THEY ARE SOLD EVERYWHERE ELSE IN THE WORLD, AND WE ARE TOLD AGAIN AND AGAIN AND AGAIN THAT THERE IS THIS PHONY EXCUSE ABOUT SAFETY. JUST COMPLETELY PHONY. NOW, I WILL HAVE MORE TO SAY ABOUT IT LATER, BUT I DID WANT TO SAY THAT WE'RE GOING TO SEE A LOT OF PEOPLE TROTTING OUT HERE WITH SUCH A SHOP-WORN, TIRED, PATHETIC ARGUMENT TO TRY TO KEEP THINGS AS THEY ARE AND TRY TO KEEP SAYING TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE YOU PAY THE HIGHEST PRICE IN THE WORLD FOR BRAND NAME DRUGS, AND THAT'S JUST OKAY, THAT'S THE WAY WE'RE GOING TO LEAVE IT. WE'LL CALL IT HEALTH REFORM, AND AT THE END OF THE DAY, THAT'S WHAT YOU END UP WITH. THE HIGHEST PRICES IN THE WORLD. A 9% INCREASE JUST THIS YEAR ALONE. OVER THE NEXT TEN YEARS, THAT 9% INCREASE JUST THIS YEAR NETS THE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY INDUSTRY $220 BILLION. BUT THAT'S OKAY. THAT'S THE WAY YOU'RE GOING TO END UP, AMERICAN CONSUMER, BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT TO GIVE YOU THE FREEDOM TO ACCESS THOSE LOWER PRICED DRUGS WHERE THEY ARE SOLD FOR A FRACTION OF THE PRICE. ONE FINAL POINT. I'VE MENTIONED OFTEN AN OLD CODGER THAT SAT ON A STRAW BALE AT A FARM ONCE WHEN I HAD A MEETING AND HE SAID I'M 80 YEARS OLD. EVERY THREE MONTHS, WE HAVE HAD TO DRIVE TO CANADA ACROSS THE BORDER BECAUSE MY WIFE HAS BEEN FIGHTING BREAST CANCER. AND WHY DO WE DRIVE TO CANADA? TO BUY TAMOXIFEN. WHY DO WE HAVE TO GO THERE TO BUY TAMOXIFEN? WE PAID I THINK HE SAID 1/10 THE PRICE IN CANADA. WE COULDN'T HAVE AFFORDED IT OTHERWISE. IS THAT WHAT WE WANT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE TO HAVE TO DO? AND MOST PEOPLE CAN'T DRIVE ACROSS THE BORDER SOMEPLACE. WHY NOT ESTABLISH A SYSTEM LIKE THEY HAVE HAD IN EUROPE FOR 20 YEARS TO ALLOW THE AMERICAN PEOPLE THE FREEDOM TO ACCESS REASONABLE PRICED DRUGS, F.D.A.-APPROVED DRUGS? SO THIS IS A -- A DAY IN WHICH WE WILL VOTE ON MY AMENDMENT AND THEN WE'LL VOTE ON A -- AN AMENDMENT THAT NULLIFIES IT, AND WE'LL SEE WHETHER ENOUGH OF A DEAL HAS BEEN MADE SO THAT THE FIX IS IN SO ONCE AGAIN THE AMERICAN PEOPLE END THIS DAY HAVING TO PAY THE HIGHEST PRICES IN THE WORLD. PAY, PAY, PAY, SOAK THE AMERICAN CONSUMER, KEEP DOING IT. THAT'S BEEN THE MESSAGE HERE FOR TEN YEARS. AND A GROUP OF US, REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS, 30 WHO HAVE COSPONSORED THIS LEGISLATION, HAVE SAID YOU KNOW WHAT? WE'RE SICK AND TIRED OF IT. GIVE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE THE FREEDOM. IF THIS IS A GLOBAL ECONOMY, HOW ABOUT A GLOBAL ECONOMY FOR REAL PEOPLE. HOW ABOUT LET THEM HAVE THE ADVANTAGES OF A GLOBAL ECONOMY. ONCE AGAIN, I'LL HAVE A LOT MORE TO SAY THIS AFTERNOON, BUT I -- IT IS -- IT IS APPARENTLY A DAY FOR DEAL MAKING, AND WE'LL SEE WHO MADE WHAT DEALS, BUT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE VOTES. MY HOPE IS -- I KNOW ONE THING. I KNOW THE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY HAS A LOT OF CLOUT. I KNOW THAT. I HOPE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE HAVE THE ABILITY TO EXPECT SOME CLOUT ON THEIR BEHALF HERE IN THE CHAMBER OF THE UNITED STATES SENATE THIS AFTERNOON. MR. PRESIDENT, I YIELD THE FLOOR.

    Show Full Text
  • 12:13:31 PM

    MR. DORGAN

    I MAKE A POINT OF ORDER THAT A QUORUM IS NOT PRESENT.

  • 12:13:34 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    PRESIDING OFFICER: THE CLERK WILL READ THE ROLL. QUORUM CALL:

  • 12:13:43 PM

    MR. DORGAN

    WITHOUT OBJECTION.

  • 12:13:45 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    WITHOUT OBJECTION.

  • 12:13:47 PM

    MR. DORGAN

    THAT IS CORRECT.

  • 12:14:22 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    OFFICER: THAT IS CORRECT.

  • 12:14:24 PM

    MR. DORGAN

    IS THERE OBJECTION?

  • 12:14:37 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THERE OBJECTION?

  • 12:14:41 PM

    MR. ENZI

    TO OBJECT. WE HAVE HAD CONSTANT SPEAKERS OVER HERE SO WE HAVE USED A LOT…

    TO OBJECT. WE HAVE HAD CONSTANT SPEAKERS OVER HERE SO WE HAVE USED A LOT OF OUR TIME. WE COULD HAVE -- IF WE HAD KNOWN THERE WAS MORE VACANT TIME AND IF WE COULD HAVE HAD SOME OF THE MAJORITY'S TIME, WE COULD HAVE HAD A STEADY STREAM OF SPEAKERS OVER HERE THE WHOLE TIME. SO WE WOULD RELUCTANTLY AGREE TO THE TIME BEING DIVIDED BETWEEN THE TWO SIDES, BECAUSE WE'VE DONE THAT IN ALL OF THE TIMES IN THE PAST, BUT WE WANT TO RESERVE SOME TIME FOR SOME OF OUR SPEAKERS AS WELL AND COULD HAVE EASILY HAD PEOPLE OVER HERE TO SPEAK.

    Show Full Text
  • 12:15:15 PM

    MR. DORGAN

    WELL, MR. PRESIDENT, IF THE SENATOR OBJECTS -- DID THE SENATOR OBJECT?

  • 12:15:19 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    YES, THE SENATOR OBJECTS.

  • 12:15:28 PM

    MR. ENZI

    OBJECTION IS HEARD.

  • 12:15:29 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    PRESIDING OFFICER: OBJECTION IS HEARD.

  • 12:15:35 PM

    MR. DORGAN

    MR. PRESIDENT, MY UNDERSTANDING IS I WILL PUT IN A QUORUM CALL THE TIME IS…

    MR. PRESIDENT, MY UNDERSTANDING IS I WILL PUT IN A QUORUM CALL THE TIME IS EQUALLY DIVIDED APPARENTLY BETWEEN THE SIDES, IN A CIRCUMSTANCE WHERE THE OTHER SIDE HAS THREE HOURS AND OUR SIDE HAS TWO HOURS. ESPECIALLY ON THE SUBJECT THAT I HAVE JUST DISCUSSED, THE OTHER SIDE HAS TWO HOURS, I HAVE ONE HOUR, BUT, MR. PRESIDENT, I WILL PUT US IN A QUORUM -- I WILL ASK -- I WILL PUT US IN A QUORUM CALL, AND I GUESS IT IS EQUALLY DIVIDED AMONG THE TWO SIDES.

    Show Full Text
  • 12:16:03 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    MR. PRESIDENT?

  • 12:17:04 PM

    Quorum Call

  • 12:29:07 PM

    MR. KYL

    THE SENATOR FROM ARIZONA.

  • 12:29:08 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THE SENATOR FROM ARIZONA.

  • 12:29:09 PM

    MR. KYL

    MR. PRESIDENT, I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT THAT FURTHER PROCEEDINGS UNDER THE…

    MR. PRESIDENT, I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT THAT FURTHER PROCEEDINGS UNDER THE QUORUM CALL BE DISPENSED WITH.

    Show Full Text
  • 12:29:13 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    OFFICER: WITHOUT OBJECTION.

  • 12:29:15 PM

    MR. KYL

  • 03:21:53 PM

    none

    EVERYBODY.

  • 03:21:54 PM

    >>

    MR. PRESIDENT, I SUGGEST THE ABSENCE OF A QUORUM.

  • 03:24:00 PM

    MR. VITTER

    MR. PRESIDENT, I SUGGEST THE ABSENCE OF A QUORUM.

  • 03:24:03 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THE CLERK WILL CALL THE ROLL. QUORUM CALL: A SENATOR: MR. PRESIDENT?

  • 03:26:46 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THE SENATOR FROM IDAHO. A SENATOR: MR. PRESIDENT, I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT…

    THE SENATOR FROM IDAHO. A SENATOR: MR. PRESIDENT, I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT THAT THE QUORUM CALL BE LIFTED.

    Show Full Text
  • 03:26:50 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    OFFICER: WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO ORDERED.

  • 03:26:54 PM

    MR. CRAPO

    WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO ORDERED.

  • 03:27:09 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    OFFICER: WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO ORDERED.

  • 03:27:11 PM

    MR. CRAPO

    MR. PRESIDENT. I BELIEVE I HAVE 20 MINUTES REMAINING, CORRECT?

  • 03:27:15 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THE SENATOR FROM IDAHO HAS 17 1/2 MINUTES REMAINING.

  • 03:27:23 PM

    MR. CRAPO

    THAT THE -- THAT I BE NOTIFIED WHEN I HAVE TWO MINUTES REMAINING.

  • 03:27:29 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    OFFICER: THE SENATOR WILL BE NOTIFIED.

  • 03:27:32 PM

    MR. CRAPO

    THE SENATOR FROM IDAHO HAS THREE MINUTES REMAINING.

  • 03:41:08 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THE SENATOR FROM IDAHO HAS THREE MINUTES REMAINING.

  • 03:41:12 PM

    MR. CRAPO

    MR. PRESIDENT, I WOULD LIKE TO RESERVE THE BALANCE OF MY TIME AND I WILL…

    MR. PRESIDENT, I WOULD LIKE TO RESERVE THE BALANCE OF MY TIME AND I WILL HOLD THAT UNTIL LATER IN THE DAY. A SENATOR: MR. PRESIDENT?

    Show Full Text
  • 03:41:26 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    OFFICER: THE SENATOR FROM WASHINGTON.

  • 03:41:30 PM

    MS. CANTWELL

    FOR THREE MINUTES OUT OF SENATOR BAUCUS' TIME TO MAKE A STATEMENT.

  • 03:41:34 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THE SENATOR RECOGNIZED. -- THE SENATOR IS RECOGNIZED.

  • 03:41:40 PM

    MS. CANTWELL

    I KNOW WE'RE IN THE MIDDLE OF A HEALTH CARE DEBATE AND WE'LL BE TALKING…

    I KNOW WE'RE IN THE MIDDLE OF A HEALTH CARE DEBATE AND WE'LL BE TALKING ABOUT THAT FOR SEVERAL DAYS, BUT I RISE TODAY TO CONGRATULATE THE PEOPLE OF WASHINGTON STATE AND THE COUNTRY ON THE 77 DREAMLINER FLIGHT THAT TOOK OVER FROM PAYNE FIELD, EVERETT, WASHINGTON, JUST A FEW DAYS AGO. SOME PEOPLE MIGHT THINK OF THAT AS GOING TO YOUTUBE AND LOOKING AT THE VIDEO AND THINKING A PLANE TOOK OFF AND WHAT'S THE SIGNIFICANCE. WELL, I CAN TELL YOU, MR. PRESIDENT, IT'S GREAT SIGNIFICANCE, NOT JUST FOR THE STATE OF WASHINGTON BUT FOR THE COUNTRY, BECAUSE THIS PLANE IS A UNIQUE PLANE, IT'S A GAME CHANGER AS FAR AS THE MARKET IS CONCERNED, BUT IT IS AMERICAN INNOVATION AT ITS BEST. THIS PLANE, BUILT NOW WITH 50% COMPOSITE MATERIALS, IS GOING TO BE A 20% MORE FUEL-EFFICIENT PLANE. THAT IS SIGNIFICANT FOR OUR COUNTRY. IT'S SIGNIFICANT BECAUSE IT MEANS THAT THE UNITED STATES CAN STILL BE A LEADER IN MANUFACTURING AND IT CAN STILL DEAL WITH SOMETHING AS COMPLEX AS FUEL EFFICIENCY IN AVIATION. BUT WHAT'S PRIDEFUL FOR US AS AMERICANS IS THAT THIS IS ABOUT AMERICAN INNOVATION AT ITS BEST. WHAT WOULD BILL BOEING SAY ABOUT TODAY? HE WOULD SAY THAT WE ACHIEVED ANOTHER MILESTONE, WHERE WE FACE INTERNATIONAL COMPETITION, BUT YET THE UNITED STATES CAN STILL BE A MANUFACTURER. WE CAN STILL BUILD A PRODUCT, STILL COMPETE, AND STILL WIN BECAUSE WE ARE INNOVATING WITH AVIATION. SO TO THE THOUSANDS OF WORKERS IN THE BOEING COMPANY AND IN PUGET SOUND, I SAY CONGRATULATIONS FOR YOUR HARD WORK, FOR THE PLANNING AND IMPLEMENTATION OF TAKING MANUFACTURING FROM AEROSPACE WITH ALUMINUM THAT HAD BEEN THE STATUS QUO NOW FOR DECADES TO DEVELOPING AN ENTIRELY NEW PLANE, 50% WITH THE NEW MATERIAL. I WANT THE UNITED STATES TO CONTINUE TO BE A MANUFACTURER, TO STILL BUILD PRODUCT, TO STILL SAY THAT WE CAN COMPETE, SO I APPLAUD THE NAME DREAMLINER. SOMEBODY IN THAT COMPANY HAD A DREAM, AND TODAY IT GOT LAUNCHED WHEN IT TOOK OFF ON THAT RUNWAY, AND I WANT TO SAY THAT THAT IS THE INNOVATIVE SPIRIT THAT HAS MADE THIS COUNTRY GREAT, AND THAT IS THE INNOVATIVE SPIRIT WE NEED TO INVEST IN. I CHANGE THE PRESIDENT AND I YIELD THE FLOOR.

    Show Full Text
  • 03:43:59 PM

    MR. McCAIN

  • 03:44:01 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THE SENATOR FROM NORTH DAKOTA.

  • 03:44:04 PM

    MR. DORGAN

  • 03:45:08 PM

    MR. McCAIN

  • 03:45:09 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THE SENATOR FROM ARIZONA IS RECOGNIZED.

  • 03:45:11 PM

    MR. McCAIN

    I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO ENGAGE IN A COLLOQUY WITH THE SENATOR FROM…

    I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO ENGAGE IN A COLLOQUY WITH THE SENATOR FROM NORTH DAKOTA.

    Show Full Text
  • 03:45:15 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    OFFICER: IS THERE OBJECTION? WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO ORDERED.

  • 03:45:18 PM

    MR. McCAIN

    IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US TO RECOGNIZE WHAT THE DORGAN AMENDMENT IS ALL ABOUT.…

    IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US TO RECOGNIZE WHAT THE DORGAN AMENDMENT IS ALL ABOUT. IT'S ABOUT AN ESTIMATED -- ACCORDING TO THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE -- WE LOVE TO QUOTE THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE AROUND HERE -- HERE -- $100 BILLION OR MORE IN CONSUMER SAVINGS. THAT'S WHAT THE DORGAN AMENDMENT DOES. AND IT CUTS THE COST OF THE BILL, OF THE LEGISLATION BEFORE US AS MUCH AS $19.4 BILLION OVER TEN YEARS. SO HERE WE'RE ALWAYS TALKING ABOUT BENDING THE COST CURVE, SAVING THE MONEY PARTICULARLY FOR OUR SENIORS, WHO USE MORE PRESCRIPTION DRUGS THAN YOUNGER AMERICANS, AND YET THERE'S OPPOSITION. AND SO I'D LIKE TO ASK MY COLLEAGUE FROM NORTH DAKOTA, ONE, HOW LONG HAS HE BEEN FIGHTING THIS ISSUE. AND, TWO, WHAT -- WHY IN THE WORLD DO WE THINK THAT ANYBODY WOULD BE OPPOSED TO AN AMENDMENT THAT WOULD SAVE $100 BILLION TO THE CONSUMERS OF AMERICA.

    Show Full Text
  • 03:46:19 PM

    MR. DORGAN

    MR. PRESIDENT, I WOULD SAY TO MY COLLEAGUE FROM ARIZONA, WE'VE BEEN…

    MR. PRESIDENT, I WOULD SAY TO MY COLLEAGUE FROM ARIZONA, WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS FOR TEN YEARS. TEN YEARS, MYSELF, THE SENATOR FROM ARIZONA AND OTHERS. HE KNOWS BECAUSE HE WAS CHAIRMAN OF THE COMMERCE COMMITTEE, WE HELD HEARINGS ON THIS IN THE COMMITTEE. NOW, THE FACT IS, WE HAVE GOTTEN VOTES ON IT BEFORE. IN EACH CASE, THE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY, THAT HAS A LOT OF MUSCLE AROUND HERE, HAS PREVAILED ON THOSE VOTES WITH AN AMENDMENT THAT IS A POISON PILL AMENDMENT SAYING SOMEBODY HAS TO IS CERTIFY WITH RESPECT TO NO ADDITIONAL SAFETY RISK AND SO ON. THESE SAFETY ISSUES ARE COMPLETELY BOGUS, ABSOLUTELY BOGUS. THEY HAVE DONE IN EUROPE FOR 20 YEARS WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING TO DO IN THIS COUNTRY, PARALLEL TRADING BETWEEN COUNTRIES, WITH NO ISSUES AT ALL. AND WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO, AS THE SENATOR FROM ARIZONA HAS INDICATED, IS SAVE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE $100 BILLION IN THE NEXT TEN YEARS BECAUSE WE ARE CHARGED THE HIGHEST PRICES IN THE WORLD FOR PRESCRIPTION DRUGS AND THERE IS NO JUSTIFICATION FOR IT. I WANT TO JUST SHOW THE SENATOR FROM ARIZONA ONE CHART AND THIS IS JUST REPRESENTATIVE. NEXIUM, IF YOU HAPPEN TO TAKE SOME NEXIUM, YOU NEED NEXIUM? WELL, FOR THE SAME QUANTITY, YOU PAY $424 IN THE UNITED STATES. IF YOU WERE IN SPAIN, YOU'D PAY $36; FRANCE, $67; SPAIN -- GREAT BRITAIN, $41; GERMANY, $37. WHY IS IT THE AMERICAN CONSUMER HAS THE PRIVILEGE OF PAYING TEN TIMES THE COST FOR EXACTLY THE SAME DRUG? SAME DRUG PUT IN THE SAME BOTTLE, MADE BY THE SAME COMPANY, MADE IN THE SAME PLANT. JUSTIFY THAT.

    Show Full Text
  • 03:47:48 PM

    MR. McCAIN

    ASK MY FRIEND, HAS HE SEEN THIS CHART? THIS CHART? THIS CHART SHOWS THAT…

    ASK MY FRIEND, HAS HE SEEN THIS CHART? THIS CHART? THIS CHART SHOWS THAT THE PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANIES IN AMERICA HAVE INCREASED WHOLESALE DRUG COSTS, WHICH IT DOESN'T REFLECT THE RETAIL DRUG COST, BY SOME 8.7% INCREASE JUST THIS YEAR WHILE THE CONSUMER PRICE INDEX, THIS LITTLE LINE HERE, INFLATION, HAS BEEN MINUS 1.3%. NOW, HOW IN THE WORLD DO YOU JUSTIFY DOING THAT? THEN THESE ARE LISTS OF THE -- OF THE MONTHLY -- OF THE INCREASES OVER A YEAR IN COSTS OF SOME OF THE MOST POPULAR OR MUCH-NEEDED PRESCRIPTION DRUGS. SO WHY WOULD PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANIES RAISE COSTS BY SOME 9% UNLESS THEY WERE ANTICIPATING SOME KIND OF DEAL THAT THEY WENT INTO. AND I'VE -- I DON'T WANT TO EMBARRASS THE SENATOR FROM NORTH DAKOTA, BUT IT ISN'T TRUE WHEN THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES WAS A MEMBER OF THIS BODY, HE COSPONSORED THIS AMENDMENT?

    Show Full Text
  • 03:48:54 PM

    MR. DORGAN

    THAT IS THE CASE, THE PRESIDENT WAS A COSPONSOR OF THIS LEGISLATION WHEN…

    THAT IS THE CASE, THE PRESIDENT WAS A COSPONSOR OF THIS LEGISLATION WHEN HE SERVED HERE LAST YEAR. I DO WANT TO SAY AS WELL, WHEN HE TALKED ABOUT NEXIUM, JUST AS AN EXAMPLE, THE AMERICAN CONSUMER GETS TO PAY TEN TIMES THE COST. NEXIUM IS FOR ACID REFLUX, PROBABLY A CONDITION THAT WILL EXIST WITH SOME AFTER THIS VOTE, BECAUSE MY UNDERSTANDING IS AFTER SEVEN DAYS ON THE FLOOR OF THE SENATE, THERE'S NOW AN ARRANGEMENT BY WHICH THE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY WILL PROBABLY HAVE SUFFICIENT VOTES TO BEAT US. ONCE AGAIN. WHICH MEANS THE AMERICAN PEOPLE LOSEMENT BUT I ALSO WANT TO MAKE THIS POINT. ANYONE WHO STANDS UP AND CITES SAFETY AND READS THE STUFF THAT COULD COME RIGHT OUT OF A COPYING MACHINE FOR TEN YEARS, UNDERSTAND THIS. DR. PETER ROASCHT, FORMER VICE PRESIDENT OF MARKETING FOR PFIZER AND FORMERLY WORKED ON EUROPE IN THE PARALLEL TRADING SYSTEM SAYS THIS -- QUOTE -- "THE BIGGEST ARGUMENT AGAINST REIMPORTATION OF PRESCRIPTION DRUGS IS SAFETY. WHAT EVERYONE HAS RECENTLY FORGOTTEN TO TELL YOU IS THAT IN EUROPE, REIMPORTATION OF DRUGS HAS BEEN IN PLACE FOR 20 YEARS." IT IS AN INSULT, IN MY JUDGMENT, TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE TO SAY, OH, YOU CAN MAKE THIS WORK IN EUROPE FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE CONSUMER TO GET LOWER PRICES, BUT THE AMERICANS DON'T HAVE THE CAPABILITY TO MAKE THIS HAPPEN, DON'T HAVE THE CAPABILITY TO MANAGE IT. THAT IS ABSURD, AND I THINK THE SAFETY ISSUE IS UNBELIEVABLY BOGUS.

    Show Full Text
  • 03:50:15 PM

    MR. McCAIN

  • 03:51:37 PM

    MR. DORGAN BILL:MR.:MR. DORGAN

    DORGAN: MR. PRESIDENT, THE SENATOR IS RIGHT THAT THIS IS GROUNDHOGS DAY.…

    DORGAN: MR. PRESIDENT, THE SENATOR IS RIGHT THAT THIS IS GROUNDHOGS DAY. IT'S 6:00 AND THE CLOCK STRIKES 6:00 AND THE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY WINS. WEWE'VE BEEN DOING IT FOR TEN YEARS -- WE JUST REPEAT THE DAY OVER AND OVER AGAIN. MY HOPE IS THAT WE WON'T HAVE TO REPEAT IT TODAY. MY HOPE IS THAT AFTER A LOT OF WORK ON A BIPARTISAN PIECE OF LEGISLATION, THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WILL HAVE SUFFICIENT SUPPORT HERE ON THE FLOOR OF THE UNITED STATES SENATE TO SAY IT IS NOT FAIR FOR US TO BE PAYING DOUBLE AND TRIPLE AND TEN TIMES THE COST THAT OTHERS IN THE WORLD ARE PAYING. NOW, MR. PRESIDENT, I WONDER IF WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO YIELD SOME TIME TO THE SENATOR FROM ARIZONA FIVE MINUTES BY CONSENT. UNLESS THE SENATOR FROM ARIZONA WISHES TO CONCLUDE.

    Show Full Text
  • 03:52:19 PM

    MR. McCAIN

    CONCLUSION IS WHAT WE ARE SEEING HERE IS REALLY WHAT, I WOULD ASK MY…

    CONCLUSION IS WHAT WE ARE SEEING HERE IS REALLY WHAT, I WOULD ASK MY FRIEND FROM NORTH DAKOTA, WH CONTRIBUTES TO THE ENORMOUS CYNICISM IN THE AMERICAN -- ON THE PART OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ABOUT THE WAY WE DO BUSINESS HERE. THIS IS A PRETTY CLEAR-CUT ISSUE. AS THE SENATOR FROM NORTH DAKOTA POINTED OUT, IT'S BEEN AROUND FOR TEN YEARS. TEN YEARS WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO HEENSURE THAT CONSUMERS OF AMERICA WOULD BE ABLE TO GET AT A LOWER COST MANY TIMES LIFESAVING PRESCRIPTION DRUGS, AND THE POWER OF THE SPECIAL INTERESTS, THE POWER OF THE LOBBYISTS, THE POWER OF CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS ARE NOW BEING MANIFESTED IN THE PASSAGE OF A KILLER AMENDMENT WHICH WILL THEN PROHIBIT -- THERE'S NO OBJECTIVE OBSERVER WHO WILL ATTEST TO ANY OTHER FACT THAN THE PASSAGE OF THE FOLLOW-ON AMENDMENT, THE SIDE-BY-SIDE AMENDMENT, WILL PROBABLY THE REIMPORTATION OF PRESCRIPTION DRUGS INTO THIS COUNTRY, WHICH WE ALL KNOW IS CAN BE DONE IN A SAFE FASHION AND COULD SAVE AMERICANS WHO ARE HURTING SO BADLY A HUNDRED BILLION DOLLARS A YEAR OR MORE AND CUT THE COST OF THE LEGISLATION BEFORE US BY $19.4 BILLION. AND TO SCARE PEOPLE TO SAY THAT THESE DRUGS THAT ARE BEING REIMPORTED ARE NOT DONE IN A SAFE AND -- A MANNER THAT WILL ENSURE THAT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE HEALTH IS NOT ENDANGERED IS, OF COURSE, AN OLD SAW THAT -- AND AN OLD MOVIE THAT WE HAVE SEEN BEFORE. IT'S REGRETTABLE. IT'S REALLY REGRETTABLE THAT THE SPECIAL INTERESTS AGAIN PREVAIL AND THE POWER OF THE PHARMACEUTICAL LOBBY. BUT I ALSO WANT TO SAY FINALLY, I -- THERE ARE MANY TRAITS THAT THE SENATOR FROM NORTH DAKOTA HAS THAT I ADMIRE. ONE OF THEM IS HIS TENACITY. AND I WANT TO ASSURE HIM THAT HE AND I RNTLE THAT I, THAT I WILL BE BY HIS SIDE AS WE GO BACK AND BACK AND BACK AGAIN ON THIS ISSUE UNTIL JUSTICE AND FAIRNESS IS DONE AND WE DEFEAT THE SPECIAL INTERESTS OF THE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY WHICH HAVE TAPE OVER THE WHITE HOUSE AND -- TAKEN OVER THE WHITE HOUSE AND WILL TAKE THOAFER VOTE THATTHISVOTE THAT WILL GO OVER AT 6:00 OF THE IT IS NOT ONE OF THE MOSTAL MICIAL CHAPTERS IN THE HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES SENATE OR THE UNITED STATES -- MOST ADMIRAL CHAPTERS IN THE HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES SENATE OR THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT.

    Show Full Text
  • 03:54:56 PM

    MR. DORGAN

    MR. PRESIDENT?

  • 03:55:23 PM

    MR. GRASSLEY

    MR. PRESIDENT?

  • 03:55:24 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    OFFICER: THE SENATOR FROM IOWA. 34 GRASSLEY: WE HAVE TWO KEY VOTES THIS…

    OFFICER: THE SENATOR FROM IOWA. 34 GRASSLEY: WE HAVE TWO KEY VOTES THIS AFTERNOON ON DRUG REIMPORTATION.

    Show Full Text
  • 03:55:30 PM

    MR. GRASSLEY

    MEAN THAT TODAY IS THE DAY THAT WE CAN SHOW THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WHETHER WE…

    MEAN THAT TODAY IS THE DAY THAT WE CAN SHOW THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WHETHER WE CAN REALLY PASS DRUG REIMPORTATION OR WHETHER THE SENATE WILL GIVE IT LIP SERVICE AND NOTHING ELSE. NOW, WE HAVE HEARD HERE ON THE FLOOR THE CONCERNS THAT SOME HAVE ABOUT DRUG IMPORTATION AND WHETHER OR NOT IT CAN BE SAFE. EVERYONE WHO KNOWS ME KNOWS THAT I CARE DEEPLY ABOUT DRUG SAFETY. THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS THAT THE UNSAFE SITUATION IS WHAT WE HAVE TODAY. TODAY, CONSUMERS ARE ORDERING DRUGS OVER THE INTERNET FROM WHO KNOWS WHERE AND THE F.D.A. DOES NOT KNOW -- DOES NOT HAVE THE RESOURCES, IN FACT, TO DO MUCH ABOUT ANYTHING ABOUT IT. THE FACT IS THAT LEGISLATION TO LEGALIZE IMPORTATION WOULD NOT ONLY HELP TO LOWER THE COST OF PRESCRIPTION DRUGS FOR ALL AMERICANS BUT ALSO SHOULD SHUT DOWN THE UNREGULATED IMPORTATION OF DRUGS FROM FOREIGN PHARMACIES THAT WE HAVE -- THE SITUATION WE HAVE TODAY. THE DORGAN AMENDMENT, IN FACT, WOULD IMPROVE DRUG SAFETY, NOT THREATEN IT, AND IT WOULD OPEN UP TRADE TO LOWER-COST DRUGS. IN 2004, MY STAFF WAS BRIEFED BY THE INVESTIGATION THAT THE PERMANENT SUBCOMMITTEE ON INVESTIGATIONS OF THE SENATE GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS COMMITTEE CONDUCTED. THAT SUBCOMMITTEE CONDUCTED THIS INVESTIGATION INTO WHAT WE WOULD CALL GOING ON RIGHT NOW, CURRENT DRUG IMPORTATION. THEY FOUND ABOUT 40,000 PARCELS CONTAINING PRESCRIPTION DRUGS COME THROUGH J.F.K. MAIL FACILITY EVERY SINGLE DAY OF THE YEAR. 40,000 PACKAGES EACH DAY. NOW, THE J.F.K. AIRPORT HOUSES THE LARGEST INTERNATIONAL MAIL BRANCH IN THE UNITED STATES, BUT EVEN THEN, THAT IS THE TIP OF THE ICEBERG. ACCORDING TO THIS SUBCOMMITTEE, EACH DAY, 30,000 PACKAGES OF DRUGS ENTER THE U.S. THROUGH MIAMI. 20 THOUSAND ENTER THROUGH CHICAGO. SO THAT'S ANOTHER 50,000 MORE -- 20,000 ENTER THROUGH CHICAGO. SO THAT'S ANOTHER 50,000 MORE PABBAGES THAT ENTER THE U.S. -- PACKAGES THAT ENTER THE U.S. EACH DAY. AND WHAT'S WORSE, ABOUT 20% OF THE DRUGS COMING IN ARE CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES. SO WE HAVE A SITUATION WHERE WE NEED THE BASIC APPROACH IN THIS AMENDMENT TO ENSURING THAT IMPORTED DRUGS ARE SAFE. AND THAT'S WHAT THE DORGAN AMENDMENT IS ALL ABOUT, TO GIVE F.D.A. THE ABILITY TO VERIFY THE DRUG PEDIGREE BACK TO THE MANUFACTURER, TO REQUIRE F.D.A. TO INSPECT FREQUENTLY AND TO REQUIRE FEES TO GIVE THE F.D.A. THE RESOURCES TO DO THAT. SO THE BOMB TOM LINE IS THE DORGAN AMENDMENT GIVES THE IN F.D.A. THE AUTHORITY AND THE RESOURCES IT NEEDS TO IMPLEMENT DRUG SAFETY FROM COURT IMPORTATION OF DRUGS. AND CERTAINLY THE PRESIDENT KNOWS THAT A GREAT WAY TO HOLD DRUG COMPANIES ACCOUNTABLE IS TO ALLOW SAFE, LEGAL DRUG IMPORTATION, BECAUSE I WOULD LIKE TO QUOTE THIS PRESIDENT NOT WHEN HE WAS A CAN CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT BUT A CANDIDATE FOR THE SENATE. THIS IS WHAT PRESIDENT OBAMA SAID THEN -- QUOTE -- "I URGE MY OPPONENT TO STOP SIDING WITH THE DRUG MANUFACTURERS AND PUT ASIDE HIS OPPOSITION TO THE REIMPORTATION OF LOWER-PRICED PRESCRIPTION DRUGS. AND NOW WE'RE HEARING ABOUT THE SECRET DEAL WITH BIG PHARMA, THAT THAT WAS REVISED JUST THIS WEEK TO SOLIDIFY SUPPORT WITH PHARMA'S ALLIES FOR KILLING THIS VERY IMPORTANT DORGAN AMENDMENT. THE DRUG COMPANIES WILL DO NOTHING. THEY WILL DO ANYTHING NOTHING TO KEEP THE UNITED STATES -- OR THEY'LL STOP AT NOTHING TO KEEP UNITED STATES CLOSED TO OTHER MARKETS IN ORDER TO CHARGE HIRER PRICES. -- CHARGE HIGHER PRICES. SO WITH THE DORGAN AMENDMENT, WE'RE WORKING TO GET THE JOB DONE. WHAT WE NEED IS TO MAKE SURE AMERICANS HAVE EVEN GREATER, MORE AFFORDABLE ACCESS TO DRUGS BY FURTHER OPENING THE DOORS TO COMMISSION IN THE GLOBAL PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY. MR. PRESIDENT, AMERICANS ARE WAITING. TOO OFTEN THIS THING HAS BEEN STYMIED. IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S ANOTHER CHANCE TO STYMIE IT. ALTHOUGH I'M SURPRISED. MOST OF THE TIMES IN THE PAST THAT I'VE BEEN FOR THE IMPORTATION OF DRUGS, IT WAS MY COLLEAGUES OVER HERE THAT WERE TRYING TO STYMIE IT. BUT NOW IT LOOKS LIKE ON THE OTHER SIDE.

    Show Full Text
  • 04:00:36 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THE SENATOR HAS USED HIS FIVE MINUTES.

  • 04:00:38 PM

    MR. GRASSLEY

    I'D BE SURPRISED IF WE DIDN'T HAVE A VAST GROUTER THIS AMENDMENT. IT WOULD…

    I'D BE SURPRISED IF WE DIDN'T HAVE A VAST GROUTER THIS AMENDMENT. IT WOULD BE A CRIME IF WE DIDN'T. I YIELD THE FLOOR.

    Show Full Text
  • 04:00:46 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THE SENATOR FROM NEW JERSEY.

  • 04:00:50 PM

    MR. LAUTENBERG

    MR. PRESIDENT?

  • 04:01:04 PM

    MR. MENENDEZ

    THE SENATOR FROM NEW JERSEY.

  • 04:01:05 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    OFFICER: THE SENATOR FROM NEW JERSEY.

  • 04:01:07 PM

    MR. MENENDEZ

    WITHOUT OBJECTION.

  • 04:01:25 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    WITHOUT OBJECTION.

  • 04:01:27 PM

    MR. MENENDEZ

    BEFORE I GET TO THE CORE OF MY REMARKS, I WANT TO TELL MY COLLEAGUE WHO…

    BEFORE I GET TO THE CORE OF MY REMARKS, I WANT TO TELL MY COLLEAGUE WHO LEFT THE FLOOR, YOU KNOW, I WAS TEMPTED TO RISE UNDER RULE 19 THAT SAYS THAT "NO SENATOR IN DEBATE SHALL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY BY ANY FORM OF WORDS IMPUGN TO ANOTHER SENATOR OR OTHER SENATORS ANY CONDUCT UNWORTHY OF BECOMING A SENATOR." YOU KNOW, I COULD IMPUTE, IF I WANTED TO I GUESS, THAT MAYBE THERE ARE SOME WHO REALLY DON'T CARE ABOUT THIS AMENDMENT AS MUCH AS THEY CARE ABOUT KILLING HEALTH CARE REFORM. BUT I WOULDN'T DO THAT. I WOULDN'T DONE DOE THAT. SO I HOPE IN THE CONTEXT OF THE DEBATE RKT I'LL NOT FORCED TO RISE UNDER RULE 19. MR. PRESIDENT, I RISE IN FAVOR OF THE AMENDMENT OF SENATOR LAUTENBERG, WHO IS GOING TO OFFER IT SHORTLY, BECAUSE IT DOES TWO THINGS THAT UNDERSCORE THE GWIRE DEBATE ABOUT HEALTH CARE REFORM. IT PROTECTS THE AMERICAN PEOPLE BY PUTTING THE SAFETY OF FAMILIES FIRST, AND THERE'S A LOT OF BRUSHING ASIDE OF SAFETY HERE. SAFETY IS PARAMOUNT. SAFETY IS PARAMOUNT, AND IT LOWERS COSTS. AND OF COURSE THAT'S WHAT THIS HEALTH CARE DEBATE IS ALL ABOUT. NOW, I APPRECIATE THE INTENTIONS OF THE AMENDMENT THAT HAS BEEN OFFERED TODAY ON THE FLOOR. BUT IN MY VIEW, IT IS REGRESSIVIVE. IT HEARKENS BACK TO A TIME WHEN THE LACK OF SUFFICIENT DRUG REGULATION ALLOWED PEOPLE TO SELL SNAKE OIL AND MAGIC ELICKS IRRELEVANCE THAT PROMISED EVERYTHING AND DID NOTHING. TO ALLOW THE IMPORTATION OF UNTESTED, UNREGULATED DRUGS MADE FROM UNTESTED AND UNREGULATED INGREDIENTS FROM 32 COUNTRIES INTO THE MEDICINE CABINETS OF AMERICAN FAMILIES, WITHOUT SERIOUS SAFETY PRECAUTIONS, FLIES IN THE FACE OF PROTECTING THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. AND IT'S CONTRARY TO THE CONTEXT OF HEALTH CARE REFORM. THE AMENDMENT BY SENATOR LAUTENBERG BRINGS US AROUND TO THE REAL PURPOSE WHY WE'VE BEEN HERE ON THE FLOOR, WHICH IS TO CREATE THE TYPE OF REFORM THAT ULTIMATELY IS GIVES GREATER HEALTH INSURANCE AND GREATEST SAFETY TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. THEY CARE ABOUT HONEST, REAL REFORM THAT MAKES HEALTH CARE AFFORDABLE AND PROTECTS AMERICAN PEOPLE, PROTECTS THEM FROM THE POTENTIAL OF COUNTERFEIT DRUGS THAT PROMISE TO CURE BUT DO ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. JUST AS WE ARE HERE TO PROTECT THEM FROM INSURANCE POLICIES THAT PROMISE TO PROVIDE HEALTH CARE FOR A PREMIUM AND THEN DENY COVERAGE AND PROVIDE NO HEALTH CARE AT ALL. MR. PRESIDENT, BASICALLY WHAT SENATOR HAUTE LAWSUIT'S AMENDMENT IS GOING TO DO IS IT MODIFY'S THE DORGAN AMENDMENT TO ALLOW REIMPORTATION BUT TO DO IT WHEN BASIC SAFETY CONCERNS TO KEEP OUR PRESCRIPTION MEDICATIONS SAFE ARE COMPLIED WITH. IT INCLUDES THE DORGAN IMPORTATION AMENDMENT BUT ADDS ONE FUNDAMENTAL ELEMENT OF BROADER HEALTH CARE REFORM: IT PROTECTS THE AMERICAN PEOPLE FROM THOSE WHO WOULD GAME THE SYSTEM FOR PROFITS AT THE EXPENSE OF HEALTH AND SAFETY OF AMERICAN FAMILIES. THAT'S WHAT THIS REFORM IS ALL ABOUT. SPECIFICALLY, WHEN IT COMES TO THE IMPORTATION OF PRESCRIPTION MEDICATION, THIS AMENDMENT WILL HELP US BE SURE THAT WHAT WE THINK WE'RE BUYING IN THE BOTTLE IS IN FACT WHAT IS IN THAT BOTTLE. YOU KNOW, I WANT TO TAKE THIS LETTER -- TALK ABOUT A LOT OF SAFETY AND A LOT OF POOH-POOHING, OH, THERE'S NO SAFETY CONCERNS. THERE IS ONE ENTITY IN THIS COUNTRY DHAS RESPONSIBLE FOR SAFETY WHEN IT COMES TO FOOD AND DRUGS. IT'S CALLED THE F.D.A., THE FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION. IN A LETTER FROM THE F.D.A. COMMISSIONER, HAMBURG, SHE MENTIONED RISKS THAT MUST BE ADDRESSED. FIRST, SHE'S CONCERNED THAT SOME IMPORTED DRUGS MAY NOT BE SAFE AND EFFECTIVE BECAUSE THEY WERE NOT SUBJECT TO A RIGOROUS REGULATORY REVIEW PRIOR TO APPROVAL. SECOND, THAT THE DRUGS MAY NOT BE A CONSISTENTLY MADE, HIGH-QUALITY PRODUCT BECAUSE THEY WERE NOT MANUFACTURED IN A FACILITY THAT COMPLY WITH APPROPRIATE GOOD MANUFACTURING PRODUCTS. THIRD -- PROCEDURES, I SHOULD SAY. THIRD, THE DRUGS MAY NOT BE SUBSTITUTABLE WITH THE F.D.A.-APPROVED PRODUCTS BECAUSE OF DIFFERENCES IN COMPOSITION OR MANUFACTURING. AND, FOWRNL, THE DRUGS SIMPLY MAY NOT BE WHAT THEY PURPORT TO BE BECAUSE INADEQUATE SAFEGUARDS IN THE SUPPLY CHAIN MAY HAVE ALLOWED CONTAMINATION OR, WORKS COUNTERFEIT. AND IT ADDRESSES F.D.A. COMMISSIONER HAMBURG'S STATEMENT OF THE AMENDMENT OF MY COLLEAGUE FROM NORTH DAKOTA. AND I QUOTE -- "THERE ARE SIGNIFICANT SAFETY CONCERNS RELATING TO ALLOWING THE IMPORTATION OF NONBIOEQUIVALENT PRODUCTS AND SAFETY ISSUES" -- SAFETY ISSUES -- "RELATED TO DISTRIBUTION AND LABELING OF FOREIGN PRODUCTS AND THE DOMESTIC PRODUCT THAT REMAINING TO FULLY ADDRESSED IN THE AMENDMENT." SENATOR LAUTENBERG'S AMENDMENT ADDRESSES THIS CONCERN. IT ALLOWS IMPORTATION, BUT IT PROTECTS THE AMERICAN PEOPLE BY REQUIRING THAT BEFORE ANY DRUG IS IMPORTED TO THE UNITED STATES, IT MUST BE CERTIFIED TO BE SAFE AND TO REDUCE COSTS. SO IT DOES WHAT THE F.D.A. COMMISSIONER IS TALKING ABOUT HERE. THE AGENCY RESPONSIBLE FOR PROTECTING THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. PEOPLE MAY WANT TO JUST NOT BELIEVE IT, THEY MAY WANT TO IGNORE IT. BUT THE FACT IS, THIS IS THE ENTITY RESPONSIBLE IN THIS COUNTRY TO PROTECT THE FOOD SUPPLY AND THE DRUG SUPPLY. WE WANT TO BE AS CERTAIN AS WE POSSIBLY CAN OF THE CONDITIONS UNDER WHICH IMPORTED DRUGS ARE MANUFACTURED, THAT THEY ARE SAFE TO USE, AND WE KNOW WHERE THEIR INGREDIENTS ORIGINATED BEFORE THEY ARE IMPORTED. WE WANT TO BE ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN THAT PATIENTS ARE GETTING PRESCRIPTION MEDICATIONS THAT ARE THE SAME IN SUBSTANCE, QUALITY, AND QUANTITY THAT THEIR DOCTOR HAS PRESCRIBED. THIS AMENDMENT REQUIRES THE SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES TO CERTIFY THAT ALL IMPORTED DRUGS ARE SAFE AND WILL REDUCE COSTS BEFORE THEY'RE ALLOWED INTO AMERICA'S MEDICINE CABINETS. AND, YOU KNOW, I'VE HEARD A LOT ABOUT THE EUROPEAN UNION HERE. WELL, LET'S LOOK AT WHAT THE EUROPEAN UNION IS NOW SAYING. THEY'RE CONSTANTLY BEING OFFERED ON THE FLOOR FOR THE REASON WHY IN FACT WE SHOULD FOLLOW WHAT THE EUROPEAN UNION IS SAYING. WELL, LET'S SEE WHAT HAPPENS IF WE ALLOW UNREGULATED IMPORTATION IMPORTATION. LET'S LOOK AT THE EUROPEAN UNION. LAST WEEK THE EUROPEAN UNION COMMISSIONER IN CHARGE OF THIS ISSUE SAID, AND I QUOTE, "THE NUMBER OF COUNTERFEIT MEDICINES ARRIVING IN EUROPE IS CONSTANTLY GROWING." "THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION IS EXTREMELY WORRIED." IN JUST TWO MONTHS, THE EUROPEAN UNION SEES 43 MILLION -- MILLION, HEAR ME -- TAKE -- FAKES. I DON'T WANT AMERICAN FAMILIES TO SEE THESE FEARS COME TO LIFE HERE, AND I'M -- I BELIEVE THAT IF WE DO NOT PASS THE LAUTENBERG AMENDMENT AND WERE TO PASS THE DORGAN AMENDMENT THAT WE WOULD OPEN THE FLOODGATES. THE EUROPEAN UNION'S EXPERIENCE ALL PROVES MY SCERNS, NOT ALLEVIATES THEM, LIKE THE OTHER SIDE WOULD SUGGEST. YOU KNOW, HERE'S THE PROBLEM. A $75 COUNTERFEIT CANCER DRUG THAT CONTAINS HALF OF THE DOSAGE THAT THE DOCTOR TOLD YOU YOU NEEDED TO COMBAT YOUR DISEASE DOESN'T SAVE AMERICANS MONEY AND CERTAINLY ISN'T WORTH THE PRICE IN TERMS OF DOLLARS OR RISK TO LIFE. LET US NOT NOW OPEN OUR NATIONAL BORDERS TO INSUFFICIENTLY REGULATED DRUGS FROM AROUND THE WORLD. IT SEEMS TO ME THAT REAL HEALTH REFORM, PARTICULARLY FOR OUR SENIORS AND THOSE WHO ARE QUALIFIED UNDER THE MEDICARE PROGRAM THAT RECEIVE THEIR PRESCRIPTION COVERAGE UNDER THAT, BY FILLING THE DOUGHNUT HOLE IN ITS ENTIRETY, WHICH WE HAVE DECLARED WE WILL DO IN THE CONFERENCE, AS WE ARE PERMITTED TO, THAT PROVIDES FOR THE COVERAGE FOR PRESCRIPTION DRUGS THAT AARP TALKS ABOUT ON BARF OF ITS MILLIONS OF MEMBERS. AND THAT'S WHAT WE WANT TO SEE, NOT BY UNREGULATED REIMPORTATION. MR. PRESIDENT, WE SHOULD HAVE NO ILLUSIONS. KEEPING OUR DRUG SUPPLY SAFE IN A GLOBAL ECONOMY IN WHICH WE CANNOT AFFECT THE MOTIVES AND WILLINGNESS OF OTHERS TO GAME THE SYSTEM FOR GREED AND PROFIT WILL BE A MONUMENTAL BUT ESSENTIAL TASK. IT WOULD REQUIRE A GLOBAL REACH, EXTRAORDINARY VIGILANCE TO INSTITUTE THE HIGHEST STANDARDS IN OTHER PARTS OF THE WORLD THAT HAVE MINIMAL STANDARDS NOW SO WE DON'T HAVE TO ASK WHICH DRUG IS REAL AND WHICH IS COUNTERFEIT. LET ME SHOW SOME OF THOSE. PEOPLE SAY, OH, NO, THIS SAFETY ISSUE ISN'T REALLY THE CASE. TAM I FLEW. WE SAW A RUSH WHEN THE H1N1 FLU ARRIVED. THERE'S ACTUALLY ONE ARIEWFD AND ONE THAT'S COUNTERFEIT. BUT THE AVERAGE PERSON WOULDN'T KNOW THE DIFFERENCE T OR IF IT IS ARICEPT, A DRUG TO SLOW THE PROGRESSION OF ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE. WHICH ONE IS THE REAL ONE AND WHICH ONE IS THE COUNTERFEIT ONE? IF I DIDN'T TELL FROM YOU THE LABELS, YOU PROBABLY WOULDN'T KNOW, BUT THERE IS AN APPROVED ONE AND A COUNTERFEIT ONE. AND LET ME TELL YOU, AS SOMEONE WHO LOST HIS MOTHER TO ALZHEIMER'S, I CAN TELL YOU THAT HAVING THE WRONG DRUG IN THE WRONG DOSAGE WOULD NOT HAVE HELPED HER SLOW THE PROGRESSION OF HER ILLNESS. IT MAKES A DIFFERENCE. LET'S LOOK AT OTHERS. LIPITOR -- VERY IMPORTANT. YOU'RE WALKING AROUND WITH A REAL PROBLEM WITH CHOLESTEROL AND ULTIMATELY YOU FIND YOURSELF -- YOU THINK YOU'RE TAKING THE APPROPRIATE DOSAGE AND THE APPROPRIATE DRUG. WHICH ONE IS THE REAL ONE? WHICH IS THE COUNTERFEIT ONE? THERE IS A COUNTERFEIT ONE AND THERE'S AN APPROVED ONE, A REAL ONE. BUT IF YOU'RE TAKING THE COUNTERFEIT ONE AND YOU THINK YOU'RE MEETING YOUR CHALLENGES AND YOU MIGHT HAVE A HEART ATTACK AS A RESULT OF NOT HAVING THE REAL ONE. BY THE TIME YOU FIGURE IT OUT, IT COULD BE TOO LATE TO REVERSE THE DAMAGE. THAT'S THE PROBLEM. THAT'S THE GLOBAL ECONOMY OPENING UP POSSIBILITIES AT THE END OF THE DAY. DOES THE GENTLEMAN HAVE AN ADDITIONAL MINUTE?

    Show Full Text
  • 04:11:58 PM

    MR. LAUTENBERG

    AN ADDITIONAL MINUTE.

  • 04:12:00 PM

    MR. MENENDEZ

    FINALLY, THIS IS A GAMBLE WE CANNOT AFFORD TO TAKE. TO OPEN UP THE…

    FINALLY, THIS IS A GAMBLE WE CANNOT AFFORD TO TAKE. TO OPEN UP THE POTENTIAL FOR THESE DRUGS OR INGREDIENTS USED IN THESE DRUGS TO FIND THEIR WAY FROM NATION TO NATION, FROM SOUTHEAST ASIA WHERE THE PROBLEM IS EPIDEMIC, TO ONE OF 32 NATIONS LISTED INTO THIS AMENDMENT INTO THE HOMES OF AMERICAN FAMILIES. THAT'S A GAMBLE WE CANNOT TAKE. THAT IS NOT ABOUT PROTECTING OUR CITIZENS. THAT IS NOT ABOUT PROVIDING PRESCRIPTION DRUGS THAT ULTIMATELY MEET THE CHALLENGE OF A PERSON'S ILLNESS. FILLING THE DOUGHNUT HOLE TOTALLY, WHICH IS WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO, IS THE WAY TO ACHIEVE IT. SO, I DO HOPE THAT THAT'S WHAT WE'LL DOVMENT I DO HOPE THAT WE WILL ADOPT SENATOR LAUTENBERG'S AMENDMENT AND DEFEAT THE DORGAN AMENDMENT, FOR I FEAR FOR THE SAFETY OF OUR CITIZENS AND, I FEAR, AS TO WHETHER OR NOT WE CAN ULTIMATELY ACHIEVE FILLING THAT DOUGHNUT HOLE, IF THIS AMENDMENT ULTIMATELY GETS ADOPTED. AND I FEAR WHAT THAT MEANS FOR HEALTH CARE REFORM AT THE END OF THE DAY. WITH THAT, I YIELD BACK THE BALANCE OF MY TIME AND THANK THE SENATOR FROM NEW JERSEY.

    Show Full Text
  • 04:13:08 PM

    MR. LAUTENBERG

    THE SENATOR NEW JERSEY.

  • 04:13:09 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    OFFICER: THE SENATOR NEW JERSEY.

  • 04:13:12 PM

    MR. LAUTENBERG

    THE CLERK WILL REPORT.

  • 04:13:16 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    OFFICER: THE CLERK WILL REPORT.

  • 04:13:18 PM

    THE CLERK

    SCWI THAT THE FURTHER READING BE DISPENSED WITH.

  • 04:13:26 PM

    MR. LAUTENBERG

    SCWI THAT THE FURTHER READING BE DISPENSED WITH.

  • 04:13:28 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    WITHOUT OBJECTION.

  • 04:13:30 PM

    MR. LAUTENBERG

    MR. PRESIDENT, I RISE TODAY BECAUSE ONE THING WE HAVE TO DO AS THE…

    MR. PRESIDENT, I RISE TODAY BECAUSE ONE THING WE HAVE TO DO AS THE PROGRESS WITH THIS HEALTH CARE REFORM BILL IS TO MAKE SURE THAT PRESCRIPTION MEDICINE IN OUR COUNTRY IS SAFE AND AFFORDABLE, AND I THANK MY COLLEAGUE FROM NEW JERSEY FOR HIS EXCELLENT REVIEW OF THE CONDITIONS THAT CAUSE US TO ADD THIS AMENDMENT. TO SENATOR DORGAN'S AMENDMENT. THAT WOULD ALLOW POTENTIALLY UNSAFE PRESCRIPTION DRUGS TO BE SHIPPED ACROSS OUR BORDERS AND DIRECTLY INTO THE MEDICINE CABINETS OF HOMES THROUGHOUT AMERICA. NOW, I WANT TO BE CLEAR, THE EFFECT OF THIS PLAN, AS THE SENATOR -- THAT SENATOR DORGAN HAS INTRODUCED COULD BE CATASTROPHIC. THAT'S WHY PRESIDENT OBAMA'S ADMINISTRATION HAS WRITTEN TO THE CONGRESS EXPRESSING ITS SERIOUS CONCERNS WITH THE DORGAN AMENDMENT. NOW, I APPRECIATE THE EFFORT TO TRY AND LOWER PRESCRIPTION DRUG PRICES. AFTER ALL, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE DOING ABOUT THE WHOLE HEALTH REFORM RERUE REVIEW IS IS TO TRY TO GET PRICES REDUCED SO EVERYONE CAN HAVE SAFE AND AFFORDABLE HEALTH CARE. WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT PEOPLE DON'T HARM THEIR HEALTH WITH ANY SHORTCUTS. WE ALL WANT AMERICANS TO STAY HEALTHY AND STILL HAVE SOME MONEY LEFT IN THEIR POCKETS. BUT AS MUCH AS WE WANT TO CUT COSTS FOR CONSUMERS, WE CANNOT AFFORD TO CUT CORNERS AND RISK EXPOSING AMERICANS TO DRUGS THAT ARE INEFFECTIVE OR UNSAFE. THE FACT IS THAT THIS IS A MATTER OF LIFE OR DEATH. THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION JUST DISCOVERED THAT COUNTERFEIT DRUGS IN EUROPE ARE WORSE THAN THEY FEARED. IN JUST TWO MONTHS -- AND I KNOW THAT SENATOR MENENDEZ MADE REFERENCE TO THIS AS WELL -- THE E.U. SEIZED 34 MILLION FAKE TABLETS, INCLUDING ANTIBIOTICS, AND CANCER TREATMENTS. AS THE COMMISSIONER OF THE E.U. SAID, EVERY FAKE DRUG IS A POTENTIAL MASSACRE. EVEN WHEN A MEDICINE ONLY CONTAINS AN INEFFECTIVE SUBSTANCE, THIS CAN LEAD TO PEOPLE DYING BECAUSE THEY THINK THEY ARE FIGHTING THEIR ILLNESSES WITH A REAL DRUG. AMERICANS BUY MEDS TO LOWER THEIR ENCLOSES -- BUY MEDICINE TO LOWER THEIR CHOLESTEROL, FIGHT CANCER AND PREVENT HEART STKAOEFPLTS IMAGINE WHAT WOULD HAPPEN TO A MOTHER OR A CHILD IF THEY START RELYING ON MEDICINE IMPORTED FROM ANOTHER COUNTRY ONLY TO FIND OUT YEARS LATER THAT THE DRUG WAS A FAKE. IMAGINE THE HEARTBREAK THAT MIGHT ENSUE IF THE MEDICINE AMERICANS WERE TAKING WAS FOUND TO BE HARMFUL. THE FACT IS DRUGS FROM OTHER COUNTRIES HAVE DANGEROUSLY HIGH COUNTERFEIT RATES, AND IMPORTATION COULD EXPOSE AMERICANS TO THOSE DRUGS. UNDER THE DORGAN ARPBLGSD DRUGS COULD BE IMPORTED FROM THE FORMER SOVIET UNION COUNTRIES WHERE THE WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION ESTIMATES THAT OVER 20% OF THE DRUGS ARE COUNTERFEIT. UNDER THE DORGAN AMENDMENT, DRUGS THAT ORIGINATED IN CHINA COULD FIND THEIR WAY INTO OUR HOMES, AND WE KNOW THAT CHINA HAS BEEN THE SOURCE OF MANY DANGEROUS PROJECTS -- PRODUCTS IN RECENT YEARS FROM TOYS LACED WITH LEAD TO TOOTHPASTE MADE WITH ANTIFREEZE. IF WE'RE GOING TO TRUST DRUGS FROM OTHER COUNTRIES, WE NEED TO BE ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN THAT WE'RE NOT PUTTING AMERICANS' LIVES AT RISK. AND THAT'S WHY THE FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION WENT ON RECORD TO EXPRESS ITS CONCERNS WITH THE DORGAN AMENDMENT. IT SAYS, "THERE ARE SIGNIFICANT SAFETY CONCERNS RELATED TO ALLOWING THE IMPORTATION OF NONBIOEQUIVALENT PRODUCTS, AND SAFETY ISSUES RELATED TO CONFUSION AND DISTRIBUTION AND LABELING OF FOREIGN PRODUCTS AND DOMESTIC PRODUCTS THAT REMAIN TO BE FULLY ADDRESSED IN THE AMENDMENT." THAT'S FROM THE F.D.A. COMMISSIONER, MARGARET HAMBURG. NOW, THERE ARE PROBLEMS THAT ASSOCIATE WITH THE POSSIBILITY OF DRUGS COMING TO THIS COUNTRY THAT ARE WAY DIFFERENT THAT THAT WHICH IS EXPECTED TO BE USED IN THE TREATMENT OF SICKNESS. WHEN PRESIDENT OBAMA'S F.D.A. COMMISSIONER WROTE, SHE ALSO SAID THAT IMPORTING DRUGS PRESENTS RISKS TO PATIENTS BECAUSE THE DRUG MAY NOT BE SAFE AND EFFECTIVE, MAY NOT HAVE BEEN MADE IN A FACILITY WITH GOOD MANUFACTURING PRACTICES AND MAY NOT BE THE DRUG IT CLAIMS TO BE. AND I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT THAT THE LETTER FROM THE F.D.A. BE INCLUDED IN THE RECORD.

    Show Full Text
  • 04:21:10 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    WITHOUT OBJECTION.

  • 04:21:11 PM

    MRS. HAGAN

    THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. I RISE TODAY TO SPEAK ABOUT DRUG RE-IMPORTATION.…

    THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. I RISE TODAY TO SPEAK ABOUT DRUG RE-IMPORTATION. WITH MILLIONS OF SENIORS BALANCING DRUG REGIMENS THAT ENTAIL TAKING SEVERAL MEDICINES PER DAY ON A FIXED INCOME, I BELIEVE WE NEED TO FIND A WAY TO ENSURE THEY HAVE ACCESS TO AFFORDABLE DRUGS. IF WE COULD REDUCE THE COST OF DRUGS WITH RE-IMPORTATION AND GUARANTEE THE SAFETY OF THOSE DRUGS, I WOULD BE VERY SUPPORTIVE. HOWEVER, I HAVE SERIOUS DOUBTS THAT WE CAN ADEQUATELY ENSURE THE SAFETY OF OUR DRUG SUPPLY WITH DRUG RE-IMPORTATION AMENDMENT PROPOSED BY MY COLLEAGUE FROM NORTH DAKOTA. EVEN WITHOUT RE-IMPORTATION, THE U.S. HAS HAD TROUBLE WITH COUNTERFEIT DRUGS. AT THE HEIGHT OF THE H1N1 EPIDEMIC THIS FALL, THE F.D.A. WAS WARNING CONSUMERS TO BE WARY OF COUNTERFEIT H1N1 TREATMENTS. THESE COUNTERFEITS CAME FROM FOREIGN ONLINE PHARMACIES. IN ONE INSTANCE THE F.D.A. SEIZED SO-CALLED KPUPB KPUPB TREATMENT TABLET FROM INDIA AND FOUND THEM TO CONTAIN TALC AND AS SEAT MET FIN. -- ACETOMOPHIN. THE SUNS DISCOVERED ABOUT 800 ALLEGED PACKAGES OF TPA EUL FAKE OR PRESCRIPTION DRUGS INCLUDING VIAGRA AND CLARITIN AND SHUT DOWN 68 ALLEGED ROGUE ONLINE PHARMACIES. COUNTERFEIT PHARMACEUTICAL DRUGS ARE APPEARING ON THE MARKET AT ALARMING RATES. IN 2007 DRUGS COMPRISED 6% OF THE TOTAL COUNTERFEIT PRODUCTS SEIZED. IN ONE YEAR THEY'VE NOW JUMPED TO 10% OF ALL COUNTERFEIT PRODUCT SEIZURES. THIS GROWING PROBLEM IS ALL ABOUT UNSCRUPULOUS CRIMINALS PREYING ON THE SICK AND THE ELDERLY WHO ARE IN DESPERATE NEED OF CHEAPER DRUGS. BUT THE CONSEQUENCES ARE HARMFUL AND IN SOME CASES DEADLY. OFFICIALS ESTIMATE THAT SOME OF THESE COUNTERFEIT DRUGS CONTAINED EITHER A DANGEROUS AMOUNT OF ACTIVE INGREDIENTS OR WERE PLACEBOS. SOME COUNTERFEITS INCLUDE TOXIC CHEMICALS SUCH AS DRY WALL MATERIAL, ANTIFREEZE AND EVEN YELLOW HIGHWAY PAINT. ACCORDING TO A RECENT "WASHINGTON POST" ARTICLE, TRACING THE ORIGINS OF DRUGS SUCH AS CYALIS AND VIAGRA TOOK INVESTIGATORS ACROSS THE GLOBE AND BACK AGAIN. SUPPOSEDLY THESE DRUGSAME FROM A WAREHOUSE IN NEW DELHI THROUGH THE ONLINE COMPANY SELLING THE DRUGS HEADQUARTERED IN CANADA WITH A LICENSE TO SELL MEDICINE IN MINNESOTA. HOWEVER, WHEN FEDERAL OFFICIALS INVESTIGATED THE DRUGS' ORIGINS FURTHER, THEY ACTUALLY FOUND THAT THE ONLINE WEB SITE WAS REGISTERED IN CHINA. ITS SERVER WAS HOSTED IN RUSSIA AND ITS HEADQUARTERS HAD PREVIOUSLY BEEN LISTED IN LOUISIANA AND ON A LOCAL LEVEL HERE NEAR OUR CAPITOL, THE "BALTIMORE SUN" YESTERDAY REPORTED ON THE DEATH OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND PHARMACOLOGIST CARY JOHN. SHE SUFFERED AN ALLERGIC REACTION TO A LEGAL DRUG IN THE U.S. BUT PURCHASED ILLEGALLY FROM THE PHILIPPINES. APPARENTLY THE COUNTERFEIT DRUG SO CLOSELY RESEMBLED THE LEGAL VERSION THAT TWO PHARMACOLOGISTS CONDUCTING THE ANALYSIS AFTER MS. JOHNS' DEATH COULD NOT TELL THE DIFFERENCE. LOCAL POLICE HAVE YET TO IDENTIFY THE CONTENTS OF THE COUNTERFEIT DRUG. A FEW OF MY COLLEAGUES HAVE ALREADY MENTIONED THE LETTER SENT LAST WEEK BY F.D.A. COMMISSIONER MARGARET HAMBURG OUTLINING THE SAFETY CONCERNS THAT THE F.D.A. HAS ABOUT RE-IMPORTATION. SPECIFICALLY, THE F.D.A. STATED THAT IMPORTING NON-F.D.A.-APPROVED PRESCRIPTION DRUGS POSED FOUR POTENTIAL RISKS TO PATIENTS. LET ME GO OVER THOSE FOUR RISKS. THE FIRST, THE DRUG MAY NOT BE SAFE AND EFFECTIVE BECAUSE IT DID NOT UNDERGO THE RIGOROUS F.D.A. REGULATORY REVIEW PROCESS. NUMBER TWO, THE DRUG MAY NOT BE CONSISTENTLY MADE HIGH-QUALITY PRODUCT BECAUSE THE FACILITY IN WHICH IT WAS MANUFACTURED WAS NOT REVIEWED BY THE F.D.A. THIRD, THE DRUG MAY NOT BE SUBSTITUTABLE WITH THE F.D.A.-APPROVED PRODUCT BECAUSE OF DIFFERENCES IN COMPOSITION OR MANUFACTURING. AND, FOURTH, THE DRUG COULD BE CONTAMINATED OR COUNTERFEIT AS A RESULT OF INADEQUATE SAFEGUARDS IN THE SUPPLY CHAIN. IF THE AGENCY THAT OVERSEES DRUG SAFETY IS SAYING IT WOULD HAVE DIFFICULTY GUARANTEEING THE SAFETY OF OUR NATION'S DRUG SUPPLY WITH PREIMPORTATION, I HAVE GRAVE CONCERNS, PARTICULARLY SINCE THE F.D.A. IS ALREADY UNDERFUNDED AND UNDERSTAFFED. BUT LET'S TAKE A MOMENT TO EXAMINE HOW EUROPE, WHICH DOES ALLOW RE-IMPORTATION, HAS FARED IN TERMS OF SAFETY. BRITISH AUTHORITIES SAY COUNTERFEIT DRUGS OFTEN EXCHANGE HANDS BETWEEN PHEUPLGD MEN AND ARE REPACKAGED MULTIPLE TIMES BEFORE REACHING A LEGITIMATE HOSPITAL OR PHARMACIST. THIS CREATES OPPORTUNITIES FOR COUNTERFEIT PRODUCTS OFTEN PRODUCED IN CHINA AND SHIPPED TO THE MIDDLE EAST TO PENETRATE THE EUROPEAN MARKET. IN 2008, BRITISH AUTHORITIES IDENTIFIED 40,000 DOSES OF COUNTERFEIT KASODEX.

    Show Full Text
  • 04:26:31 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THE SENATOR HAS USED FIVE MINUTES.

  • 04:26:33 PM

    MRS. HAGAN

    MR. PRESIDENT, I WOULD LIKE TO ASK FOR ABOUT THREE MORE MINUTES.

  • 04:26:36 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    WITHOUT OBJECTION.

  • 04:26:39 PM

    MRS. HAGAN

    THE SENATOR FROM NEW JERSEY.

  • 04:29:45 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THE SENATOR FROM NEW JERSEY.

  • 04:29:46 PM

    MR. LAUTENBERG

    YES, MR. PRESIDENT. I BELIEVE THAT MY COLLEAGUE FROM NORTH DAKOTA INTENDS…

    YES, MR. PRESIDENT. I BELIEVE THAT MY COLLEAGUE FROM NORTH DAKOTA INTENDS TO MAKE FURTHER REMARKS. HOW MUCH TIME DO WE HAVE ON OUR SIDE, PLEASE?

    Show Full Text
  • 04:30:03 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THE SENATOR FROM NEW JERSEY CONTROLS 13 MINUTES.

  • 04:30:10 PM

    MR. LAUTENBERG

    MINUTES. MR. PRESIDENT, IF SENATOR DORGAN IS HERE AND WE'RE TRYING TO…

    MINUTES. MR. PRESIDENT, IF SENATOR DORGAN IS HERE AND WE'RE TRYING TO ACCOMMODATE A COLLEAGUE WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON THIS -- BUT HOW MUCH TIME IS LEFT ON THE DORGAN SIDE OF THE ISSUE?

    Show Full Text
  • 04:30:30 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    OFFICER: 28 MINUTES.

  • 04:30:37 PM

    MR. LAUTENBERG

    WITHOUT OBJECTION.

  • 04:34:47 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    WITHOUT OBJECTION.

  • 04:34:50 PM

    MR. LAUTENBERG

    MR. PRESIDENT, WE'RE -- I NOW WILL CALL FOR A -- A QUORUM CALL AND ASK…

    MR. PRESIDENT, WE'RE -- I NOW WILL CALL FOR A -- A QUORUM CALL AND ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT THAT IT BE CHARGED EQUALLY TO BOTH SIDES.

    Show Full Text
  • 04:35:05 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    YOU CAN'T DO THAT. THERE'S 8 1/2 MINUTES LEFT ON --

  • 04:35:18 PM

    MR. GRASSLEY

    THAT'S CONSIDERABLY MORE --

  • 04:35:22 PM

    MR. LAUTENBERG

    THAT'S CONSIDERABLY MORE --

  • 04:35:27 PM

    MR. GRASSLEY

    HAVE 8 -- [INAUDIBLE] A SENATOR: MR. PRESIDENT, LET ME ASK THAT THE…

    HAVE 8 -- [INAUDIBLE] A SENATOR: MR. PRESIDENT, LET ME ASK THAT THE SENATOR FROM NEW JERSEY WITHHOLD HIS REQUEST FOR A QUORUM.

    Show Full Text
  • 04:35:42 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    OFFICER: DOES THE SENATOR WITHHOLD? [INAUDIBLE] A SENATOR: MR. PRESIDENT?

  • 04:35:50 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    PRESIDING OFFICER: THE SENATOR FROM NORTH DAKOTA.

  • 04:35:55 PM

    MR. DORGAN

    BACK IN THE MID 1800'S WHEN LINCOLN AND DOUGLAS HAD DEBATES, LINCOLN WAS…

    BACK IN THE MID 1800'S WHEN LINCOLN AND DOUGLAS HAD DEBATES, LINCOLN WAS EXASPERATED BECAUSE HE COULDN'T GET DOUGLAS TO UNDERSTAND WHAT HE WAS SAYING. TO DOUGLAS HE SAID, LISTEN, HOW MANY LEGS DOES A HORSE HAVE? DOUGLAS SAID, WHY FOUR, OF COURSE. AND LINCOLN SAID IF YOU CALL THE TAIL A LEG HOW MANY LEGS DOES A HORSE HAVE? DOUGLAS SAID FIVE. AND LINCOLN SAID, NO, CALLING A TAIL A LEG DOESN'T MAKE IT A LEG AT ALL. THAT'S WHAT MY COLLEAGUES HAVE DONE. SUGGESTING THAT THE AMENDMENTS THAT WE OFFERED IS FOR UNTESTED, UNREGULATED DRUGS. IT IS JUST NOT TRUE. THE ONLY DRUGS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE ARE F.D.A. APPROVE DRUGS MADE IN AN F.D.A. INSPECTED PLANT THAT ARE PART OF A CHAIN OF CUSTODY THAT IS THE EQUIVALENT TO THE UNITED STATES CHAIN OF CUSTODY. IT IS LIMP SI NOT TRUE THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT -- SIMPLY NOT TRUE THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT UNTESTED, UNREGULATED DRUGS COMING FROM WHAT USED TO BE THE SOVIET UNION. THAT'S SIMPLY NOT TRUE. SIMPLY SAYING IT DOESN'T MAKE IT TRUE. HERE'S WHY WE'RE ON THE FLOOR OF THE UNITED STATES SENATE. WE'RE REFORMING HEALTH CARE. RIGHT? WE'RE GOING TO HAVE HEALTH CARE REFORM. PART OF HEALTH CARE IS PRESCRIPTION DRUGS. A LOT OF PEOPLE TAKE PRESCRIPTION DRUGS TO KEEP THEM OUT OF THE HOSPITAL BED. IT MANAGES THEIR DISEASE. PRESCRIPTION DRUGS ARE VERY IMPORTANT. HERE'S WHAT HAPPENED TO PRESCRIPTION DRUG PRICES YEAR AFTER YEAR AFTER YEAR. AS YOU CAN SEE THE RATE OF INFLATION IS HERE IN YELLOW, PRESCRIPTION DRUG PRICES HERE IN RED. THIS YEAR ALONE UP 9%. 9% THIS YEAR. AT A TIME WHEN INFLATION IS BELOW ZERO. WELL, WHY DO WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO ACCESS THE SAME F.D.A.-APPROVED DRUG WHERE IT'S SOLD ELSEWHERE AT A FRACTION OF THE PRICE? BECAUSE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE GOING TO PAY IN THE NEXT DECADE IF WE DON'T PASS THIS LEGISLATION $100 BILLION IN EXCESS PRESCRIPTION DRUG PRICES. YOU NEED TO TAKE NEXTUP FOR A-- NEXIUM FOR ACID REFLUX? IF YOU BUY IT, IT WILL COST YOU YOU $424 FOR AN EQUIVALENT QUANTITY IN THE UNITED STATES, $65 IN CANADA, $424 HERE. LIPITOR, THE MOST POPULAR CHOLESTEROL-LOWERING DRUG IN THE WORLD. $125 IN THE UNITED STATES FOR AN EQUIVALENT QUANTITY. YOU CAN BITE SAME THING FOR DZ 40DZ IN THE U.K. DZ 32 IN SPAIN, ONE-FOURTH OF THE PRICE. $33 IN CANADA. THE AMERICAN PEOPLE GET TO PAY TRIPLE OR QAWD QUADRUPLE THE PRICE. BY THE WAY, IT COMES IN THESE BOTTLES, I ASK CONSENT TO USE THE BOTTLES. THESE ARE BOTTLES THAT ARE -- THAT DID CONTAIN LIPITOR. MADE IN IRELAND BY AN AMERICAN CORPORATION. SAME BOTTLE, DIFFERENT COLORED LABEL. SAME BOTTLE, WITH THE SAME BILL, F.D.A. APPROVED, SENT TO DIFFERENT PLACES. THIS TO CANADA, THIS TO THE UNITED STATES. THE AMERICAN BUYER HAS THE PRIVILEGE OF PAYING TRIPLE THE PRICE. SOUND FAIR? IT DOESN'T TO ME. BONIVA UP 18% FOR PRICE. SINGULAR UP 12%, EMBREL UP 12%, BONIVA, PLAVIX, THE LIST GOES ON. SHOULD WE SAY, LET'S PASS HEALTH CARE REFORM AND IGNORE WHAT'S HAPPENING TO THE PRICE OF PRESCRIPTION DRUGS. THIS AMENDMENT THAT I OFFERED WITH SENATOR McCAIN, SENATOR GRASSLEY, MANY OF MY COLLEAGUES ON THIS SIDE, 30 CO-SPONSORS, THIS AMENDMENT THAT I -- COSPONSORS, THIS AMENDMENT THAT I OFFERED IS FOR FREEDOM FOR THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. HOW ABOUT GIVING THE AMERICAN PEOPLE THE ABILITY TO ACCESS IDENTICAL PRESCRIPTION DRUGS, WE KNOW ARE IDENTICAL BECAUSE -- THOSE WHO TALK ABOUT SAFETY, LET ME -- LET ME REMIND THEM 40% OF THE ACTIVE INGREDIENTS IN U.S. PRESCRIPTION DRUGS COME FROM INDIA AND CHINA, FROM PLACES IN INDIA AND CHINA THAT HAVE NEVER BEEN INSPECTED. THAT'S IN THE EXISTING DRUG SUPPLY. 40%. "THE WALL STREET JOURNAL," DID SOME REALLY TERRIFIC EXPOSES ABOUT THIS. YOU KNOW, THERE WERE OVER 60 PEOPLE IN THIS COUNTRY DIED FROM SOMETHING CALLED HEPARIN, CONTAMINATED HEPARIN? HERE'S WHERE THEY WERE TAKING IT. "THE WALL STREET JOURNAL," DID THESE PICTURES. YOU'LL SEE THRUSTY, OLD POT. AND, BY THE WAY, BEING STIRRED WITH THE LIMB FROM A TREE. YEAH, KNOWS ARE ACTIVE INGREDIENTS FOR AMERICAN DRUGS. HERE'S A GUYS THAT WORKING WITH PIG INTESTINES, THE GUTS FROM A HOG. AND THIS OLD PLANT OVER HERE WITH THE WOODEN STICK. LOOKS KIND OF SANITARY, DOESN'T IT? OR MAYBE UNSANITARY. AND THAT'S THE SOURCE OF HEPARIN. THESE ARE THE PHOTOGRAPHS BY "THE WALL STREET JOURNAL," INVESTIGATIVE REPORTER. THEY'RE TELLING US F.D.A. APPROVED DRUGS WITH A CHAIN OF CUSTODY IDENTICAL TO US WOULD POSE SOME SORT OF THREAT. ARE YOU KIDDING? YOU CAN MAKE THAT CHARGE WITHOUT LAUGHING OUTLOUD? WELL, MR. PRESIDENT, LET'S TALK ABOUT THE EXISTING DRUG SUPPLY JUST FOR A MOMENT. THIS YOUNG MAN, NAMED TIM FAGAN. HE WAS A VICTIM OF COUNTERFEIT DOMESTIC DRUGS IN THIS COUNTRY. NOT REIMPORTATION OF F.D.A. APPROVED DRUGS. YOU WANT TO KNOW WHERE THIS GUY'S DRUG CAME FROM? WELL, HERE'S THE INVESTIGATIVE REPORT THAT WAS DONE ON THAT. IT'S MADE BY AMGEN. IT ENDED UP IN PLACE IN PLAYPEN, A SOUTH FLORIDA STRIP CLUB, IN THE COOLER OF A SOUTH FLORIDA STRIP CLUB. AT ONE POINT IT WAS IN A COOLER IN CAR TRUNKS, AND, FINALLY, WAS A PRESCRIPTION DRUG PRESCRIBED FOR THIS YOUNG MAN NAMED MR. TIM FAGAN. HE SURVIVED THE ORDEAL, BUT HE WAS GETTING MEDICINE WITH ONE 1-20th OF THE STRENGTH FOR THE DISEASE THAT HIS DOCTOR INTENDED FOR HIM. DON'T TALK TO ME ABOUT THE ISSUE OF PRESCRIPTION DRUG SAFETY. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SAFETY THAT DOESN'T NOW EXIST IN THE DOMESTIC DRUG SUPPLY THAT WE INCLUDED IN THIS AMENDMENT. SAYING THAT EVERY DRUG SHOULD HAVE A PEDIGREE, TRACK IT WHERE IT CAME FROM IN EVERY RESPECT FROM THERE TO THE CONSUMPTION. IT SHOULD HAVE BATCH LOTS AND TRACERS. MR. PRESIDENT, I WANT TO QUOTE FORMER VICE PRESIDENT OF PFIZER CORPORATION, A PRESCRIPTION DRUG MANUFACTURER. "RIGHT NOW -- THIS IS DR. PETER ROST. "RIGHT NOW, DRUG COMPANIES ARE TESTIFYING THAT IMPORTED DRUGS ARE UNSAFE. NOTHING COULD BE FURTHER FROM THE TRUTH." THIS FROM THE VICE PRESIDENT OF ONE OF THE MAJOR DRUG COMPANIES. NOTHING COULD BE FURTHER FROM THE TRUTH. HE WAS FIRED, TO BE SURE. YOU CAN'T SAY THAT IF YOU'RE WITH A DRUG COMPANY. THEIR BUSINESS IS TO TRY TO KEEP THEIR PRICING STRATEGY THE WAY IT IS. AND I MIGHT SAY I DON'T HAVE A BEEF WITH THE DRUG INDUSTRY. I HAVE A BEEF WITH THEIR PRICING POLICY. THEIR PRICING POLICY THAT SAYS WE'LL SELL THE SAME DRUG EVERYWHERE IN THE WORLD AT A FRACTION OF THE PRICE THAT WE CHARGE THE AMERICAN CONSUMER. HOW DO YOU MAKE THAT NICK YOU MAKE THAT STICK BY -- STICK? YOU MAKE IT STICK BY A LAW THAT SAYS THAT THEY CANNOT BE IMPORT THEIR DRUGS. THE SPANISH CAN REIMPORT THEIR DRUGS, BUT THE U.S. IS TOLD YOU DON'T HAVE THE SAME FREEDOM TO SHOP FOR THE SAME F.D.A. APPROVED DRUG. APPROVED BECAUSE IT IS INSECOND BY THE FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION IN, THE U.S. CONSUMER DOES NOT HAVE THE FREEDOM TO MAKE THAT PURCHASE. NOW, MR. PRESIDENT, IF I MIGHT, PETER ROST, THE SAME GUY I JUST QUOTED, FORMER VICE PRESIDENT OF MARKETING AT PFIZER. "DURING MY TIME RESPONSIBLE FOR A REGION IN NORTHERN EUROPE, I NEVER ONCE HEARD THE DRUG INDUSTRY, REGULATORY AGENCIES, THE GOVERNMENT OR ANYONE ELSE SAYING THIS PRACTICE WAS UNSAFE. AND I PERSONALLY THINK IT IS OUTRIGHT DERROGATORY TO CLAIM THAT THE AMERICANS WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO HANDLE THE REIMPORTATION OF DRUGS WHEN THE REST OF THE WORLD CAN DO THIS." DR. PETER ROST, THE BIGGEST ARGUMENT AGAINST REIMPORTATION IS SAFETY. WHAT EVERYONE HAS CONVENIENTLY FORGOTTEN TO TELL YOU IS THAT IN EUROPE REIMPORTATION OF DRUGS HAS BEEN IN PLACE FOR 20 YEARS. HANK McKENNEL, FORMER PFIZER C.E.O. NAME AN INDUSTRY IN WHICH COMPETITION IS ALLOWED TO FLOURISH, COMPUTERS, TELECOMMUNICATIONS, SMALL PACKAGE SHIPPING, RETAILING, ENTERTAINMENT, AN I'LL SHOW YOU LOWER PRICES, HIGHER QUALITY, MORE INNOVATION, AND BETTER CUSTOMER SERVICE. THERE ORDINARY AN EXCEPTION. OKAY, THERE'S ONE. SO FAR THE HEALTH CARE INDUSTRY SEEMS IMMUNE TO THE DISCIPLINE OF COMPETITION. NOWHERE IS THAT MORE EVIDENT THAN WITH RESPECT TO PHARMACEUTICAL DRUGS, NOWHERE. SO, MR. PRESIDENT, THE QUESTION TODAY IS WILL WE ONCE AGAIN OFFER A PRESCRIPTION DRUG REIMPORTATION BILL THAT WOULD SAVE CONSUMERS AND THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT $100 BILLION, THAT CONTAINS SAFETY CIRCUMSTANCES THAT DON'T EXIST EVEN IN THE DOMESTIC DRUG SUPPLY, THAT WILL NOT POSE RISK BUT, IN FACT, REDUCE RISK, REDUCE PRICES FOR THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, PROVIDE FAIR PRICING FOR AMERICAN CONSUMERS? WILL WE BE ABLE TO VOTE FOR THAT LEGISLATION THAT I AND SENATOR McCAIN, SENATOR GRASSLEY, SENATOR STABENOW, SENATOR KLOBUCHAR AND SO MANY OTHERS HAVE BROUGHT TO THE FLOOR OF THE SENATE? THE ANSWER IS YEAH, WE'RE GOING TO VOTE ON THAT. THE QUESTION IS IN THE SEVEN DAYS SINCE I HAVE INTRODUCED THIS, HAS THE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY BEEN ABLE TO PRY ENOUGH PEOPLE AWAY FROM THIS BECAUSE THEY'RE RAISING ALL KINDS OF ISSUES OF SAFETY? OF COURSE, THE ISSUES REALLY HAVE TO DO WITH THEIR REVENUE. WE KNOW THAT. SO HOW MANY VOTES WILL WE GET? AND BY THE WAY, THE STAND-ALONE BILL -- I SHOULD SAY THE SIDE-BY-SIDE BILL IS JUST A KILLER BILL, SO WE'LL HAVE A SECOND VOTE AND WE'LL SEE. A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE GOING TO SAY YOU KNOW WHAT? WE'LL VOTE FOR THIS BILL AND THEN WE'LL VOTE TO NULLIFY IT BY VOTING FOR THE LAUTENBERG AMENDMENT. LET ME READ THE AARP LETTER WHICH WAS SENT YESTERDAY." ON BEHALF OF THE AARP'S NEARLY 40 MILLION MEMBERS, WE URGE YOU TO SUPPORT THE DORGAN-SNOWE IMPORTATION AMENDMENT TO H.R. 3590, THE SENATE HEALTH CARE REFORM LEGISLATION. THE AMENDMENT PROVIDES FOR SAFE, LEGAL IMPORTATION OF LOWER PRICED PRESCRIPTION DRUGS FROM ABROAD. C.B.O. HAS SCORED THE AMENDMENT AS SAVING MORE THAN THAN $19 BILLION." THAT'S JUST FOR THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. THERE IS MUCH MORE FOR CONSUMERS." WE ALSO URGE YOU TO VOTE AGAINST AN ALTERNATIVE IMPORTATION AMENDMENT PROPOSED BY SENATOR LAUTENBERG AND MENENDEZ. THE AARP STRONGLY OPPOSES THIS AMENDMENT BECAUSE IT INCLUDES THE UNNECESSARY ADDITION OF A CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENT WHICH IS SIMPLY A THINLY VEILED EFFORT TO UNDERMINE IMPORTATION AND PRESERVE THE STATUS QUO OF HIGH DRUG PRICES. -- DRUG PRICES." SO THERE IT IS. WE ARE ALWAYS TOLD THERE IS THIS FINELY CRAFTED PIECE, LIKE EMBROIDERING WITH LOTS OF SOPHISTICATED COLORS, THIS FINELY CRAFTED PIECE, AND DON'T MESS WITH IT BECAUSE IF YOU PASS YOUR AMENDMENT SOMEHOW, THE WHOLE THING IS GOING TO COME APART. IT'S LIKE PULLING A THREAD ON A CHEAP SUIT. YOU PULL THE THREAD AND THE ARM FALLS OFF. GOD FORBID ANYBODY SHOULD PASS AN AMENDMENT LIKE THIS. AND SO HERE WE ARE SEVEN DAYS AFTER I INTRODUCED THIS AMENDMENT AND WE HAVE A CIRCUMSTANCE WHERE WE NOW HAVE A SIDE-BY-SIDE IN ORDER TO TRY TO NULLIFY IT, AND WE HAVE HAD ALL KINDS OF DEALING GOING ON. I'M NOT A PART OF IT. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE DEALS ARE. I DON'T KNOW WHAT TIME THEY WERE CONSUMMATED. SOMEBODY TOLD ME LATE LAST NIGHT THERE WAS ANOTHER DEAL. AND I'M LIKE THE OLD SENATOR WHO SERVED HERE LONG AGO WHO SAID I'M NOT FOR ANY DEAL I'M NOT A PART OF. THIS DEAL IS FOR THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. AND SO WE'RE GOING TO LEAVE HEALTH CARE OUT OF THIS CHAMBER AT SOME POINT, GOING TO PASS SOME HEALTH CARE LEGISLATION, AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO SHUFFLE AROUND WITH OUR HANDS IN OUR POCKETS OR MAYBE THUMBING OUR SUSPENDERS AND STICKING OUT OUR SHINED SHOES AND SAY WELL, WE DID THIS ALL RIGHT AND WE FEAL REALLY GOOD ABOUT IT, BUT WE COULDN'T DO A THING ABOUT PRESCRIPTION DRUG PRICES. WE COULDN'T DO THAT, WE JUST DIDN'T HAVE THE SUPPORT BECAUSE THE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY WOULDN'T LET US. OH, REALLY? WELL, MAYBE AT LAST, AT LONG, LONG LAST THERE WILL BE SUFFICIENT FRIENDS HERE ON THIS VOTE ON BEHALF OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE TO SAY WE STAND WITH THE CONSUMER, WE STAND WITH THE AMERICAN CONSUMERS TODAY. WE LIKE THE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY. WE WANT THEM TO PRODUCE PRESCRIPTION DRUGS, WE WANT THEM TO MAKE PROFITS. WE JUST DON'T WANT THEM TO CHARGE US TEN TIMES, FIVE TIMES, THREE TIMES OR DOUBLE WHAT'S BEING CHARGED OTHERS IN THE WORLD FOR THE IDENTICAL PRESCRIPTION DRUG BECAUSE WE DON'T THINK IT'S FAIR TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. MR. PRESIDENT, HOW MUCH TIME REMAINS?

    Show Full Text
  • 04:50:02 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THE SENATOR HAS 13 1/2 MINUTES.

  • 04:50:06 PM

    MR. DORGAN

    MR. PRESIDENT, LET ME AT THIS POINT YIELD THE FLOOR, AND I WILL ASK FOR A…

    MR. PRESIDENT, LET ME AT THIS POINT YIELD THE FLOOR, AND I WILL ASK FOR A QUORUM CALL. I DON'T KNOW WHETHER THE SENATOR FROM NEW JERSEY HAS OTHER SPEAKERS. WE HAVE A COUPLE OF SPEAKERS I BELIEVE THAT WILL BE HERE AND MAKE A POINT OF ORDER THAT A QUORUM IS NOT PRESENT.

    Show Full Text
  • 04:50:26 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    CLERK WILL CALL THE ROLL. QUORUM CALL:

  • 04:50:32 PM

    MR. DORGAN

    IS THERE OBJECTION? THE SENATOR FROM NEW JERSEY.

  • 04:50:39 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THERE OBJECTION? THE SENATOR FROM NEW JERSEY.

  • 04:50:52 PM

    MR. LAUTENBERG

    THE SENATOR FROM NEW JERSEY CONTROLS SEVEN MINUTES.

  • 04:51:07 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    SEVEN?

  • 04:51:11 PM

    MR. LAUTENBERG

    SEVEN.

  • 04:51:15 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    SEVEN MINUTES?

  • 04:51:17 PM

    MR. LAUTENBERG

    SEVEN MINUTES?

  • 04:51:18 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    SEVEN MINUTES.

  • 04:51:20 PM

    MR. LAUTENBERG

    ALL RIGHT, WELL, MR. PRESIDENT, I, TOO, HAVE PEOPLE WHO WANT TO SPEAK TO…

    ALL RIGHT, WELL, MR. PRESIDENT, I, TOO, HAVE PEOPLE WHO WANT TO SPEAK TO THE ISSUE, BUT IF WE CAN EQUALLY DIVIDE THE QUORUM CALL, THAT'S ALL RIGHT WITH ME, I HAVE NO OBJECTION.

    Show Full Text
  • 04:51:37 PM

    MR. DORGAN

    MR. PRESIDENT, I BELIEVE THE QUORUM CALL WILL BE MOMENTARY. WE HAVE PEOPLE…

    MR. PRESIDENT, I BELIEVE THE QUORUM CALL WILL BE MOMENTARY. WE HAVE PEOPLE COMING TO SPEAK. IF NOT, I WILL TAKE ADDITIONAL TIME AS PERHAPS WITH THE SENATOR FROM NEW JERSEY, BUT I ASK CONSENT THAT THE -- I MAKE A POINT OF ORDER THAT A QUORUM IS NOT PRESENT AND ASK CONSENT THAT IT BE CHARGED AGAINST ALL SIDES EQUALLY.

    Show Full Text
  • 04:51:55 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THERE OBJECTION? WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO ORDERED. QUORUM CALL:

  • 04:52:48 PM

    MR. DORGAN

    LET ME ASK CONSENT THE QUORUM CALL BE WAIVED.

  • 04:52:51 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    WITHOUT OBJECTION.

  • 04:52:54 PM

    MR. DORGAN

    I -- I DID NOT SPEAK ABOUT THE LETTER FROM THE FOOD AND DRUG…

    I -- I DID NOT SPEAK ABOUT THE LETTER FROM THE FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION. MY COLLEAGUES HAVE DESCRIBED THIS LETTER WHICH I SAID COULD HAVE COME OUT OF A COPYING MACHINE, BUT IT'S -- IT'S THE SAME LETTER THAT HAS COME ALWAYS. IT IS INTERESTING TO ME THAT WE EXPORT A LOT OF AMERICAN JOBS, ALL KINDS OF JOBS LEAVING OUR COUNTRY, AND THEN WE IMPORT CONTAMINATED WALLBOARD, CHILDREN'S TOYS THAT KILL KIDS -- AND YES, THAT'S HAPPENED. WE IMPORT CONTAMINATED PET FOOD AND CONTAMINATED TOOTHPASTE. AND SO WE IMPORT 85% OF THE SEAFOOD IN THIS COUNTRY EVERY DAY, 85% OF THE SEAFOOD AND 1% IS INSPECTED, BY THE WAY. 1% OF THAT SEAFOOD IS INSPECTED. THE REST IS NOT. WE IMPORT FRUITS AND VEGETABLES. AND I'M WONDERING IF THE FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION IS SENDING LETTERS AROUND WITH CONCERN ABOUT THE RISK TO HEALTH OF FRUITS AND VEGETABLES AND SEAFOODS THAT ARE NOT INSPECTED. IN MANY PLACES, PRODUCED WITH INSECTICIDES AND VARIOUS THINGS THAT WOULD NOT BE PERMITTED IN THIS COUNTRY. SO I'M WONDERING WHERE THE F.D.A.'S LETTER IS WITH RESPECT TO THAT. NOW, I CALLED THE FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, AND I -- I TALKED TO THE HEAD OF THE F.D.A., AND I SAID I UNDERSTAND THERE ARE SOME RUMORS AROUND YOU'RE GOING TO SEND A LETTER UP HERE. THIS IS 24 HOURS BEFORE THE LETTER CAME. THEN THE HEAD OF THE F.D.A. SAID I KNOW NOTHING OF SUCH A LETTER. SO MY QUESTION IS WHERE DID THE LETTER COME FROM? WHO PROMPTED THE LETTER? I THINK I KNOW. BUT I JUST FIND IT REALLY INTERESTING THAT I DON'T SEE ANYBODY DOWN AT THE F.D.A. SENDING LETTERS UP HERE ABOUT THE ISSUE OF SAFETY ON FRUITS AND VEGETABLES AND FISH. THEY RAISED THE QUESTION OF SAFETY WITH RESPECT TO A PRESCRIPTION DRUG REIMPORTATION BILL THAT HAS THE MOST SPECIFIC AND THE MOST RIGOROUS SAFETY STANDARDS, NOT ONLY FOR REIMPORTED DRUGS BUT FOR THE EXISTING DOMESTIC DRUG SUPPLY, THE KIND OF SAFETY STANDARDS THAT THE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY HAS OBJECTED TO FOR MANY, MANY YEARS. OF COURSE I WOULD BE HAPPY TO YIELD.

    Show Full Text
  • 04:55:19 PM

    MR. LAUTENBERG

    I KNOW SENATOR DORGAN VERY WELL, A MAN OF GREAT PRINCIPLE AND SKILL, I…

    I KNOW SENATOR DORGAN VERY WELL, A MAN OF GREAT PRINCIPLE AND SKILL, I MIGHT SAY, BUT I WOULD SAY THAT THE LIST OF ABERRATIONS OR LACK OF CARE ABOUT THE VARIOUS PRODUCTS, THE TOYS, THE WALLBOARDS AND FOOD, AND I HAVE HAD A GREAT INTEREST IN IT. WHETHER IT IS BEING SUGGESTED BY THE SENATOR FROM NORTH DAKOTA THAT THAT'S AN ACCEPTABLE STANDARD AND WE OUGHT TO GO AHEAD AND CONTINUE THAT.

    Show Full Text
  • 04:55:53 PM

    MR. DORGAN

    MR. PRESIDENT, THE SENATOR IS NOT ASKING A QUESTION. I YIELDED FOR A…

    MR. PRESIDENT, THE SENATOR IS NOT ASKING A QUESTION. I YIELDED FOR A QUESTION. IF YOU HAVE ONE AND TRUNCATE IT, I WOULD APPRECIATE IT.

    Show Full Text
  • 04:56:01 PM

    MR. LAUTENBERG

    IS WHETHER OR NOT YOU THINK THAT CASUAL STANDARD FOR BRINGING IN FOOD AND…

    IS WHETHER OR NOT YOU THINK THAT CASUAL STANDARD FOR BRINGING IN FOOD AND OTHER PRODUCTS IS ACCEPTABLE AND THEREFORE WE OUGHT TO DO THE SAME WITH DRUGS?

    Show Full Text
  • 04:56:09 PM

    MR. DORGAN

    MR. PRESIDENT, RECLAIMING MY TIME, THE ANSWER IS SELF-EVIDENT BY THE…

    MR. PRESIDENT, RECLAIMING MY TIME, THE ANSWER IS SELF-EVIDENT BY THE QUESTION. OF COURSE THE STANDARD DOESN'T EXIST IN AN APPROPRIATE WAY FOR FISH AND FOR VEGETABLES AND FOR FRUITS. THAT'S THE POINT I WAS MAKING. BUT WHAT WE HAVE DONE WITH RESPECT TO THE REIMPORTATION OF PRESCRIPTION DRUGS IS WE HAVE INCLUDED BATCH LOTS AND PEDIGREE AND TRACERS THAT DON'T EXIST IN THE EXISTING DRUG SUPPLY. WHY? THE EXISTING DRUG SUPPLY DON'T HAVE THOSE -- DO NOT HAVE THOSE PROVISIONS BECAUSE THEY HAVE BEEN OBJECTED TO OVER THE YEARS BY THE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY. WE HAVE PUT IN PLACE THINGS THAT WILL MAKE THIS SAFE. YOU CAN'T SAY THE SAME THING ABOUT FRUIT AND VEGETABLES AND SEAFOOD, UNFORTUNATELY. A LOT OF WORK NEEDS TO BE DONE THERE. BUT WE DON'T BRING A BILL TO THE FLOOR OF THE UNITED STATES SENATE, A BIPARTISAN GROUP OF LEGISLATORS, A BILL THAT WOULD IN ANY WAY INJURE OR PROVIDE PROBLEMS WITH RESPECT TO SAFETY. WHAT WE DO IS BRING A BILL TO THE FLOOR OF THE SENATE THAT DRAMATICALLY ENHANCES THE MARGIN OF SAFETY FOR PRESCRIPTION DRUGS. BUT I UNDERSTAND, I UNDERSTAND COMPLETELY IF I WERE TRYING TO PROTECT -- AND I WERE THE DRUG INDUSTRY TRYING TO PROTECT PROTECT $100 BILLION, BOY, I UNDERSTAND THE EXERTION OF EFFORTS TO TRY TO PROTECT THAT. MY ONLY POINT IS THIS. I HAVE A BEEF WITH AN INDUSTRY THAT DECIDES THEY'RE GOING TO OVERCHARGE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, IN SOME CASES TEN TIMES MORE, SOME CASES FIVE, DOUBLE THE PRICE THAT IS PAID IN OTHER PARTS OF THE WORLD FOR THE IDENTICAL DRUG. I DON'T THINK THAT'S FAIR AND I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD ALLOW IT TO CONTINUE, AND THE WAY TO PREVENT IT IS TO GIVE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE THE FREEDOM. EVERY EUROPEAN HAS THAT FREEDOM. AND LET ME END WITH WHAT I BEGAN WITH. FOR SOMEBODY TO COME OUT HERE AND SAY THAT THIS IS ABOUT UNREGULATED, UNTESTED DRUGS IS ABSOLUTE, SHEER NONSENSE. IT IS NOT. WE DON'T HAVE TO DEBATE WHAT WORDS MEAN AND WHAT WORDS SAY. THAT'S NOT A DEBATE THAT WE OUGHT TO TAKE TIME HAVING. ALL WE HAVE TO DO IS READ IT AND REPRESENT IT ACCURATELY WHICH HAS NOT BEEN THE CASE ON THE FLOOR OF THE UNITED STATES SENATE REGRETTABLY. I YIELD THE FLOOR. MR. PRESIDENT, I MAKE A POINT OF ORDER THAT A QUORUM IS NOT PRESENT.

    Show Full Text
  • 04:58:26 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

  • 04:58:34 PM

    MR. DORGAN

  • 04:58:35 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THE QUORUM CALL IS IN PROGRESS.

  • 04:58:38 PM

    MR. DORGAN

    MR. PRESIDENT, I ASK THE QUORUM CALL BE WAIVED BY CONSENT.

  • 04:58:41 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    OFFICER: WITHOUT OBJECTION.

  • 04:58:43 PM

    MR. DORGAN

    NO.

  • 04:58:47 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    OFFICER: NO.

  • 04:58:48 PM

    MR. DORGAN

    MR. PRESIDENT, I ASK THAT IT BE EQUALLY CHARGED AGAINST ALL SIDES.

  • 04:58:53 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

  • 04:59:36 PM

    MR. BAUCUS

  • 04:59:38 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THE SENATOR FROM MONTANA.

  • 04:59:40 PM

    MR. BAUCUS

    WITHOUT OBJECTION.

  • 04:59:43 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    OFFICER: WITHOUT OBJECTION.

  • 04:59:45 PM

    MR. BAUCUS

    MR. PRESIDENT?

  • 05:13:28 PM

    MR. BROWNBACK

    THE SENATOR FROM KANSAS.

  • 05:13:29 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    OFFICER: THE SENATOR FROM KANSAS.

  • 05:13:32 PM

    MR. BROWNBACK

    WITHOUT OBJECTION.

  • 05:13:40 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    WITHOUT OBJECTION.

  • 05:13:43 PM

    MR. BROWNBACK

    THE SENATOR FROM NEW JERSEY.

  • 05:19:53 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THE SENATOR FROM NEW JERSEY.

  • 05:19:55 PM

    MR. LAUTENBERG

    WHO YIELDS TIME?

  • 05:25:48 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    WHO YIELDS TIME?

  • 05:26:20 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THE SENATOR FROM MONTANA.

  • 05:26:23 PM

    MR. BAUCUS

    15.

  • 05:26:26 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    15.

  • 05:26:27 PM

    MR. BAUCUS

    MR. PRESIDENT, I YIELD MYSELF MINUTES TO MY GOOD FRIEND FROM IOWA, WHO I…

    MR. PRESIDENT, I YIELD MYSELF MINUTES TO MY GOOD FRIEND FROM IOWA, WHO I THINK IS GOING TO BE SPEAKING AGAINST MY POSITION, BUT HE IS A GOOD FELLOW, SO HE SHOULD HAVE FIVE MINUTES.

    Show Full Text
  • 05:26:37 PM

    MR. GRASSLEY

    THIS IS TYPICAL OF THE COMITY OF THE UNITED STATES SENATE, AND I THANK MY…

    THIS IS TYPICAL OF THE COMITY OF THE UNITED STATES SENATE, AND I THANK MY GOOD FRIEND FOR DOING THAT. I HAVE A LITTLE DIFFERENT VIEW ON SOME OF THE THINGS HE SAID ABOUT TAXES HERE, AND I RESPECT HIS GIVING ME SOME TIME BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE TIME ON THIS SIDE. SO IT IS NICE OF HIS DOING THAT. REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS ARE WORKING OFF OF THE SAME DATA PROVIDED BY THE JOINT COMMITTEE ON TAXATION. FOR SOME REASON, MY FRIENDS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE AISLE SEEM TO WANT TO READ THIS DATA SELECTIVELY, SO I'D LIKE TO LOOK AT THIS DATA. AND I WANT TO STRESS THAT THIS DATA IS FROM THE NONPARTISAN JOINT COMMITTEE ON TAXATION. THEY'RE EXPERTS. THEY'RE NONPOLITICAL PEOPLE THAT TELL IT LIKE IT IS. SO, I -- MY FRIENDS ON THE OTHER SIDE ARE CORRECT IN ONE THING. THIS BILL PROVIDES A TAX BENEFIT TO A SMALL GROUP OF AMERICANS, AND YOU CAN SEE RIGHT HERE THAT THIS BENEFIT IS TO THE PEOPLE HERE WHERE THE MINUS SIGN IS IN FRONT OF THE NUMBERS. AND THESE NUMBERS ARE IN WHITE. AS I POINTED OUT PREVIOUSLY, WHEN YOU SEE A NEGATIVE NUMBER ON THIS CHART, THE JOINT COMMITTEE ON TAXATION IS TELLING US THAT THESE PEOPLE ARE RECEIVING A TAX BENEFIT. THIS INCOME CATEGORIES -- THE INCOME CATEGORIES WHERE YOU SEE THESE NEGATIVE NUMBERS BEGIN AT ZERO AND STRETCH TO $50,000 FOR INDIVIDUALS AND $75,000 FOR FAMILIES. THAT WOULD BE $50,000 AND $75,000. SO I WANT TO GIVE MY DEMOCRAT FRIENDS CREDIT FOR BEING ON THE RIGHT SIDE -- OR RIGHT ON THIS PART OF THE DATA. BUT I WANT TO SHOW YOU WHERE I DISAGREE WITH THEM AND THEIR CHOOSING TO OVERLOOK OTHER PARTS OF THE DATA. AND THE DATA I'LL SOON REFER TO HERE ON THIS CHART. WHEN WE SEE NEGATIVE NUMBERS ON THIS CHART, AS I'VE SAID, THE JOINT COMMITTEE ON TAXATION IS TELLING US THAT THERE IS A TAX BENEFIT. SO CONVERSELY, WHERE THERE ARE POSITIVE NUMBERS -- THIS WOULD BE AN EXAMPLE OF POSITIVE NUMBERS -- THE JOINT COMMITTEE ON TAXATION IS TELLING US THAT THESE TAXPAYERS ARE SEEING A TAX INCREASE. SO THOSE NUMBERS I'VE ALREADY POINTED TO. THEY BEGIN AT $50,000 FOR AN INDIVIDUAL AND GO UP TO $200,000 FOR AN INDIVIDUAL. WHEN WE SEE A POSITIVE NUMBER, THEN IT'S REVERSED. THE JOINT COMMITTEE ON TAXATION IS TELLING US THAT THESE TAXPAYERS ARE IN FACT SEEING TAX INCREASES. SO IF WE SEE POSITIVE NUMBERS FOR INDIVIDUALS MAKING MORE THAN $50,000 AND WE SEE POSITIVE NUMBERS FOR FAMILIES MAKING MORE THAN $75,000, IT'S JUST THIS SIMPLE: WE KNOW THAT THESE PEOPLE'S TAXES ARE GOING TO GO UP. THE JOINT COMMITTEE ON TAXATION IS TELLING US THAT TAXES FOR THESE INDIVIDUALS, ONCE AGAIN, FOR A THIRD TIME, WILL GO UP UNDER THIS 2,074-PAGE REID BILL. THESE INDIVIDUALS AND FAMILIES ARE MAKING LESS THAN $200,000, AND WHAT'S SIGNIFICANT ABOUT LESS THAN $200,000? IT IS THAT THIS VIOLATES WHAT THE PRESIDENT PROMISED IN HIS CAMPAIGN, THAT INDIVIDUALS THAT ARE MIDDLE CLASS UNDER $200,000 ARE NOT GOING TO SEE ONE DIME OF TAX INCREASE. SO TO COME TO ANY DIFFERENT CONCLUSION IS SAYING THAT THE DATA ON THIS CHART AND, OF COURSE, THE PROFESSIONALS AT THE JOINT COMMITTEE ON TAXATION, THAT BOTH ARE WRONG. TO COME TO ANY DIFFERENT CONCLUSION IS SAYING THE CHART PRODUCED BY THE JOINT COMMITTEE ON TAXATION IS WRONG. I YIELD THE FLOOR AND THANK MY COLLEAGUE FOR THE TIME HE GAVE TO ME. PWAU MR. PRESIDENT?

    Show Full Text
  • 05:31:13 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

  • 05:31:14 PM

    MR. BAUCUS

  • 05:31:15 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THE SENATOR FROM MONTANA.

  • 05:31:17 PM

    MR. BAUCUS

    11 MINUTES.

  • 05:31:19 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    OFFICER: 11 MINUTES.

  • 05:31:21 PM

    MR. BAUCUS

    THIS SIDE. DOES ANYONE HAVE REMAINING TIME?

  • 05:31:24 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    MR. PRESIDENT?

  • 05:31:50 PM

    MR. BAUCUS

    MR. PRESIDENT?

  • 05:31:51 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    OFFICER: THE SENATOR FROM MONTANA.

  • 05:31:53 PM

    MR. BAUCUS

    I YIELD MYSELF FIVE MINUTES.

  • 05:31:55 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    WITHOUT OBJECTION.

  • 05:31:57 PM

    MR. BAUCUS

    MR. PRESIDENT, I'D LIKE TO MAKE IT VERY CLEAR, ESSENTIALLY THIS…

    MR. PRESIDENT, I'D LIKE TO MAKE IT VERY CLEAR, ESSENTIALLY THIS LEGISLATION DOES SEVERAL THINGS. THIS IS THE CORE PART OF THIS LEGISLATION. WHAT IS IT? FIRST, THIS LEGISLATION VERY SIGNIFICANTLY REFORMS THE HEALTH INSURANCE INDUSTRY, ESPECIALLY FOR PEOPLE WHO INDIVIDUALLY BUY INSURANCE, AND ALSO FOR PEOPLE WHO BUY WITH A SMALL COMPANY AND EVEN WHO BUY INSURANCE WITH A LARGE COMPANY. IT'S INSURANCE MARKET REFORM. IT STOPS INSURANCE COMPANIES FROM, FRANKLY, UNDERTAKING PRACTICES WHICH I THINK ARE VERY UN-AMERICAN, IF YOU WILL. THAT IS DENYING PEOPLE COVERAGE BASED ON PREEXISTING CONDITION, DENYING THEM HEALTH INSURANCE BECAUSE THEY HAVE SOME KIND OF PREEXISTING SOMETHING. THAT'S RIDICULOUS. OR SAYING YOU CAN'T HAVE HEALTH INSURANCE BECAUSE SOME OTHER HEALTH CARE STATUS. OR SAYING WE'LL GIVE YOU A POLICY, AND A MONTH OR TWO MONTHS LATER RESCIND IT WILLY-NILLY. OR PUTTING IN THESE VERY RESTRICTIVE LIMITS ON WHAT THE COMPANY WILL PAY DURING YOUR LIFETIME OR WHAT THE COMPANY MIGHT PAY IN HEALTH INSURANCE BENEFITS FOR A YEAR. IN ADDITION, IN THIS LEGISLATION REFORM IS CALLED RATING THE STATES HAVE. STATES BASICALLY CAN CHARGE WHATEVER THEY WANT AND ALLOW COMPANIES TO CHARGE WHATEVER THEY WANT IF YOU'RE A LITTLE OLDER COMPARED WITH YOU'RE YOUNGER, IF YOU'RE A WOMAN COMPARED WITH IF YOU'RE A MAN, LOTS OF DIFFERENT WAYS STATES ALLOW HEALTH INSURANCE COMPANIES TO RATE, THAT IS CHARGE. IT'S WRONG. NUMBER ONE, INSURANCE MARKET REFORM. THIS LEGISLATION STOPS SOME OF THE OUTRAGEOUS PRACTICES INSURANCE COMPANIES PRACTICE TODAY. NUMBER TWO, THIS LEGISLATION BEGINS TO GET CONTROL OVER HEALTH CARE COSTS IN THIS COUNTRY. WE HAVE TO, MR. PRESIDENT, START TO GET CONTROL OVER HEALTH CARE COSTS. THIS LEGISLATION DOES SO. IT ALSO IS DEFICIT-NEUTRAL. THAT IS, IT DOES NOT COST ONE THIN DIME FOR US TO ENACT THIS LEGISLATION. IT'S ALL PAID FOR. I MIGHT ALSO SAID SA EU IT PROVIDES HEALTH INSURANCE COVERAGE FOR ABOUT 31 MILLION AMERICANS. 31 MILLION AMERICANS WHO CURRENTLY DO NOT HAVE HEALTH INSURANCE TODAY WILL HAVE HEALTH INSURANCE IF THIS LEGISLATION PASSES. I DON'T HAVE TO REMIND ALL OF US OF THE IMPORTANCE OF HEALTH INSURANCE. INSURANCE MARKET REFORM, LOWERS THE COST OF HEALTH CARE IN THIS COUNTRY, PROVIDES FULL COVERAGE AND I THINK EQUALLY IMPORTANT, BEGINS TO PUT IN PLACE CALLED DELIVERY SYSTEM REFORM. THAT'S KIND OF WONKISH. I THINK ONE OF THE MOST PARTS OF THIS BILL, NAMELY, CHANGE THE WAY WE START TO PAY DOCTORS AND HOSPITALS, ON QUALITY RATHER THAN QUANTITY. START TO PUT INTO EFFECT DIFFERENT SYSTEMS THAT SOUND KIND OF WONKISH BUT WILL BE VERY IMPORTANT OVER THREE OR FOUR OR FIVE YEARS. IT'S BUNDLING. IT'S GROUP HOME. IT'S REDUCING, LOWERING THE PRACTICE OF HOSPITALS THAT READMIT TOO QUICKLY AFTER A PATIENT IS DISCHARGED. THERE'S SO MANY REFORMS HERE. I STRONGLY URGE EVERYONE TO KEEP HIS EYE ON THE BALL. INSURANCE MARKET REFORM IN THIS LEGISLATION, LOWERING COSTS IN THIS LEGISLATION, LOWERING TAXES IN THIS LEGISLATION, INSURANCE COVERAGE FOR 31 MILLION AMERICANS TODAY WHO DO NOT HAVE IT AND START TO PUT IN PLACE PAYMENT REFORMS WHICH ARE GOING TO HELP GET THIS COUNTRY ON THE RIGHT PATH SO THAT AFTER SEVERAL YEARS WE HAVE A HEALTH CARE SYSTEM THAT WE'RE ALL VERY, VERY PROUD OF, ONE THAT GETS RID OF ALL THE WASTE WE HAVE IN OUR COUNTRY TODAY. WE PAY $2.5 TRILLION A YEAR IN HEALTH CARE, ABOUT HALF PUBLIC AND HALF PRIVATE. PEOPLE WHO STUDY THIS SAY WE WASTE BETWEEN AS MUCH AS $800 BILLION A YEAR. NOT MILLION. BILLION A YEAR IN FRAUD, IN WASTE, DOLLARS THAT DON'T GO DIRECTLY TO HEALTH CARE. THIS LEGISLATION STARTS TO GET A HANDLE ON THAT. IT STOPS ALL THAT WASTE, GETS A BETTER HANDLE ON THAT FRAUD SO AFTER TWO OR THREE OR FOUR YEARS, SOMETHING WE'RE VERY PROUD OF. MR. PRESIDENT, REMIND OURSELVES AGAIN, IF WE DON'T DO THIS, PASS THIS LEGISLATION, WE'LL RUE THE DAY WE DIDN'T BECAUSE WE'LL HAVE TO START ALL OVER AGAIN TWO OR THREE OR FOUR OR FIVE YEARS FROM NOW, AND THE PROBLEMS WILL BE MUCH WORSE. COST FOR FAMILIES IS GOING TO BE MUCH GREATER. COST TO AMERICAN BUSINESSES MUCH GREATER. OUR BUDGETS WILL BE IN MUCH WORSE SHAPE. MEDICARE AND MEDICAID -- THIS LEGISLATION, BY THE WAY, EXTENDS THE SOLVENCY OF THE TRUST FUND FOR ANOTHER, I THINK IT'S NINE YEARS. REMEMBER THE BOTTOM LINE HERE. REMEMBER THE BASICS. LET'S NOT GET TOO CAUGHT UP IN THE DETAILS AND THE WEEDS AND GET EXTRACTED BY STUFF THAT'S NOT IN THE CORE PROVISIONS OF THIS BILL. THE PROVISIONS I OUTLINED I THINK ARE COMPELLING REASONS WHY THIS LEGISLATION MUST PASS AND WHY IT WOULD BE SO GOOD FOR AMERICA. AND I RESERVE THE BALANCE OF MY TIME. A SENATOR: MR. PRESIDENT?

    Show Full Text
  • 05:37:13 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    OFFICER: THE SENATOR FROM IDAHO.

  • 05:37:15 PM

    MR. CRAPO

    WITHOUT OBJECTION.

  • 05:37:22 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    OFFICER: WITHOUT OBJECTION.

  • 05:37:23 PM

    MR. CRAPO

    THANK YOU SO MUCH, MR. PRESIDENT. I'D LIKE TO RESPOND TO A COUPLE OF…

    THANK YOU SO MUCH, MR. PRESIDENT. I'D LIKE TO RESPOND TO A COUPLE OF POINTS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE ABOUT WHETHER THIS BILL TRULY ADDRESSES WHAT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE ASKING IT TO ADDRESS. IF YOU ASK MOST PEOPLE IN AMERICA WHAT THEY WANT IN HEALTH CARE REFORM -- AND THEY DO WANT HEALTH CARE REFORM -- WHAT THEY WILL TELL YOU IS THEY WANT TO SEE SOME CONTROL OVER THE SKYROCKETING COSTS OVER HEALTH CARE, PARTICULARLY THE SKYROCKETING COSTS OVER INSURANCE PREMIUMS. AND THEY'D LIKE TO SEE INCREASED ACCESS TO QUALITY MEDICAL CARE. IT'S BEEN SAID A NUMBER OF TIMES BY THE PROPONENTS OF THIS LEGISLATION THAT THIS BILL ACCOMPLISHES SOME OF THOSE OBJECTIVITIES BUT LET'S LOOK AT WHAT THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE TOLD US ON THE CORE ISSUE, NAMELY, WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN TO YOUR INSURANCE PREMIUMS IF THIS BILL IS PASSED. AND WHAT THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE VERY CLEARLY SAID, WHICH IS ALSO BACKED UP BY SEVEN OR EIGHT OR NINE OR TEN OTHER STUDIES IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR AS WELL AS THE JOINT COMMITTEE ON TAXATION AND WAS BACKED UP FURTHER BY THE CHIEF ACTUARY FOR THE MEDICARE AND MEDICAID SERVICES, IS THAT FOR AT LEAST 30% AND THE MOST VULNERABLE PEOPLE IN AMERICA, IF YOU ARE LOOKING AT WHETHER YOUR INSURANCE PREMIUMS ARE GOING TO GO UP OR DOWN, THEY'RE GOING TO GO UP, NOT DOWN. IF YOU'RE A MEMBER OF THE 17% OF AMERICANS WHO GET YOUR INSURANCE IN THE INDIVIDUAL MARKET, YOUR INSURANCE IS GOING TO GO WAY UP. IN FACT, IT'S GOING TO GO UP BY AS MUCH AS 10% TO 13% IN ADDITION TO WHAT IT WOULD HAVE GONE UP WITHOUT THE BILL. IF YOU ARE SOMEONE WHO GETS YOUR BUSINESS FROM SMALL GROUPS, FROM A SMALL-GROUP MARKET, YOUR INSURANCE COSTS ARE GOING TO GO UP FROM 1% TO 3%. AND IF YOU'RE ONE OF THE AMERICANS WHO IS ABLE TO GET YOUR INSURANCE IN THE LARGE-GROUP MARKET, THEN YOU CAN BASICALLY EXPECT THAT THE BILL WILL HAVE NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON YOU. THERE IS A POSSIBILITY OF A SLIGHT REDUCTION, BUT THE POTENTIAL IS REALLY THAT IT'S JUST GOING TO HAVE NO IMPACT AT ALL. SO WHAT DOES THE BILL DO? FOR 17% OF AMERICANS IN THE INDIVIDUAL MARKET AND FOR 13% OF AMERICANS IN THE SMALL-GROUP MARKET, IT CLEARLY MAKES YOUR LEGISLATION -- YOUR HEALTH CARE PREMIUMS GO UP. AND FOR THOSE WHO ARE IN THE REMAINDER OF THE MARKET, IT BASICALLY DOESN'T ACHIEVE THE OBJECTIVE OF HEALTH CARE REFORM. AND AT WHAT PRICE? WE OFTEN HEAR THAT WE NEED TO BEND DOWN THE COST CURVE. WELL, AS I'VE INDICATED, MR. PRESIDENT, THIS LEGISLATION DOESN'T BEND DOWN THE COST CURVE AMERICANS ARE TALKING ABOUT, NAMELY, THE PRICE OF THEIR HEALTH CARE OR THEIR HEALTH INSURANCE. WHAT DOES IT DO WITH REGARD TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT? WELL, IT'S GOING TO INCREASE THE COST TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OF HEALTH CARE BY $2.5 TRILLION OF A MASSIVE NEW ENTITLEMENT PROGRAM. SO THAT PRICE CURVE IS NOT BENT DOWN. AND THEN WHAT ARE WE LEFT WITH? SOME SAY, WELL, THE DEFICIT IS GOING TO GO DOWN UNDER THIS BILL. THERE'S ONLY ONE WAY THE DEFICIT CAN GO DOWN UNDER THIS BILL, AND THAT IS IF YOU TAKE AWAY THE BUDGET GIMMICKS, THE MASSIVE TAX INCREASES AND THE MASSIVE MEDICARE CUTS. BUT JUST -- I'LL JUST TALK ABOUT THE BUDGET GIMMICK BECAUSE OF THE LACK OF TIME. THE SPENDING SIDE OF THIS BILL IS DELAYED FOR FOUR YEARS. THE TAXING AND CUTTING, KPHAEURL CUTTING SIDE OF THE -- MEDICARE CUTTING SIDE OF THE BILL IS IMPLEMENTED ON DAY ONE. WE HAVE TEN YEARS OF TAX INCREASES TO OFFSET SIX YEARS OF SPENDING. I THINK THAT'S THE WAY THE NUMBER WAS REACHED. YOU HAVE TO FIGURE OUT HOW MANY YEARS TO DELAY THE SPENDING START BEFORE YOU CAN SAY THAT THERE WAS A DEFICIT-NEUTRAL BILL. THE REALITY IS THIS BILL DOESN'T DEAL WITH ANY OF THOSE TAX CURVES -- THOSE SPENDING CURVES. NOW, THE AMENDMENT THAT WE'LL BE VOTING ON IN JUST A FEW MINUTES HERE IS MY AMENDMENT THAT WOULD SIMPLY ADDRESS THE TAX SIDE OF THE BILL. AND ALL IT SAYS IS LET'S CHANGE THE BILL TO COMPLY WITH THE PRESIDENT'S PROMISE, NAMELY, THAT PEOPLE MAKING LESS THAN $200,000 A YEAR INDIVIDUALLY OR $250,000 AS A COUPLE WOULD NOT PAY MORE TAXES. WHAT WE FOUND FROM THE JOINT TAX COMMITTEE IS IT ANALYZES THIS BILL IS THAT 73 MILLION AMERICANS IN THAT CATEGORY WILL PAY MORE TAXES. IN FACT, IT'S NOT 73 MILLION AMERICANS. IT'S 73 MILLION AMERICAN HOUSEHOLDS THAT WILL PAY MORE TAXES AND SEE A TAX INCREASE UNDER THIS BILL. AND NOT JUST A SMALL ONE. IT'S A MASSIVE, HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF NEW TAXES THAT WILL BE IMPOSED BY THIS BILL. IN RESPONSE THE PROPONENTS OF THIS BILL SAY THIS BILL REALLY IS A TAX CUT. THE ONLY WAY THEY CAN SAY THIS BILL IS A TAX CUT IS BY LOOKING AT THE SUBSIDY THAT IS GOING TO BE PROVIDED, AND THAT SUBSIDY IS AS CONGRESS INTERESTINGLY DOES, DESCRIBED AS A TAX CUT. IT'S CALLED REFUNDABLE TAX CREDIT, ALTHOUGH THREE-FOURTHS OF IT, 73% TO BE ACCURATE, GOES TO PEOPLE WHO DO NOT PAY TAXES. YET, IT IS CALLED TAX RELIEF BECAUSE IT'S ADMINISTERED THROUGH THE TAX CODE AND IS DESCRIBED AS A REFUNDABLE TAX CREDIT. THE C.B.O. GETS THIS AND AMERICANS GET THIS. THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE SAYS THESE AREN'T TAX CUTS. THIS IS SPENDING, AND IT IS SCORED THAT WAY BY THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE AS IT ANALYZES THE BILL. AND THE ONLY WAY YOU CAN SAY THAT THIS BILL INVOLVES THESE KINDS OF TAX CUTS IS IF YOU SAY THAT A PROVISION THAT WILL SIMPLY RESULT IN THE PAYMENT OF A CHECK BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO AN INDIVIDUAL WHO HAS NO TAX LIABILITY TO A SYSTEM WITH THEIR HEALTH CARE COSTS IS A TAX CUT. WELL, LET'S ACCEPT THAT. EVEN IN THAT CASE, ONLY 7% OF AMERICANS QUALIFY FOR THAT SUBSIDY, AND THE REST OF THE AMERICANS QUALIFY FOR THE TAX INCREASES. AND TO SAY THAT THE PRESIDENT'S PROMISE WAS THAT I WON'T CUT YOUR TAXES MORE, OR I WON'T INCREASE YOUR TAXES MORE THAN I WILL CUT SOMEONE ELSE'S TAXES -- AND BY THE WAY I'LL CALL A DIRECT SUBSIDY A TAX CUT -- IS NOT EXACTLY WHAT I THINK THE PRESIDENT MEANT. IT'S DEFINITELY NOT WHAT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE THOUGHT HE MEANT WHEN HE SAID THAT AMERICANS MAKING LESS THAN $200,000 OR $250,000 AS A FAMILY WOULD NOT PAY MORE TAXES UNDER THIS BILL. SO AGAIN, MY PROPOSAL SIMPLY SAYS SEND THIS BILL BACK TO THE FINANCE COMMITTEE. THEY CAN TURN IT AROUND QUICKLY IF THEY WANT TO, AND HAVE THEM TAKE OUT THE PROVISIONS THAT VIOLATE THE PRESIDENT'S PLEDGE ON TAXES. AND WITH THAT, MR. PRESIDENT, I RESERVE THE BALANCE OF OUR TIME. A SENATOR: MR. PRESIDENT?

    Show Full Text
  • 05:43:41 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

  • 05:43:48 PM

    MR. BROWN

  • 05:43:49 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THE SENATOR FROM OHIO.

  • 05:43:51 PM

    MR. BROWN

    THE SENATOR'S TIME EXPIRED.

  • 05:46:54 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THE SENATOR'S TIME EXPIRED.

  • 05:46:57 PM

    MR. BROWN

    THE SENATOR FROM MONTANA.

  • 05:47:01 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THE SENATOR FROM MONTANA.

  • 05:47:03 PM

    MR. BAUCUS

    PRESIDENT, I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT THAT AT 6:00 P.M. TODAY THE SENATE…

    PRESIDENT, I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT THAT AT 6:00 P.M. TODAY THE SENATE PROCEED TO VOTE IN RELATION TO THE AMENDMENTS AND MOTION SPECIFIED IN THE ORDER OF DECEMBER 14 REGARDING H.R. 3590. THAT PRIOR TO EACH VOTE THERE BE TWO MINUTES OF DEBATE EQUALLY DIVIDED AND CONTROLLED IN THE USUAL FORM. AFTER THE FIRST VOTE IN THE SEQUENCE, THE SUCCEEDING VOTES BE LIMITED TO 10 MINUTES EACH. FURTHER ALL THAT PROVISIONS IN THE DECEMBER 14 ORDER REMAIN IN EFFECT.

    Show Full Text
  • 05:47:31 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THE SENATOR FROM NORTH DAKOTA.

  • 05:47:34 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THE SENATOR FROM NORTH DAKOTA.

  • 05:47:36 PM

    MR. DORGAN

    THE SENATOR FROM ALASKA.

  • 05:48:30 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THE SENATOR FROM ALASKA.

  • 05:48:34 PM

    MR. BEGICH

    YOUR COMMENTS. I THINK YOU'RE RIGHT. OUT OF ALL OF THE COMPLEX BILLS, THIS…

    YOUR COMMENTS. I THINK YOU'RE RIGHT. OUT OF ALL OF THE COMPLEX BILLS, THIS SEEMS SO SIMPLE. WHEN I WAS MAYOR, WE WORKED ON THIS ISSUE, IT SEEMS LOGICAL, SINCE WE BORDER CANADA, IT SEEMS LOGICAL. I KNOW YOU STATED THESE COMMENTS BEFORE, I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT FOR, ESPECIALLY MY VIEWERS, WHO ARE WATCHING FROM ALASKA, BECAUSE THERE IS A FOUR-HOURS DIFFERENCE. THERE IS A SAVINGS TO TAXPAYERS VERY CLEAR HERE. THERE ARE SAVINGS TO THE CONSUMERRER, WHICH IS IMPORTANT. REMIND ME OF THE NUMBERS. BUT I WANT TO BE SURE I HAVE THEM AS I TALK ABOUT THIS BILL.

    Show Full Text
  • 05:49:09 PM

    MR. DORGAN

    THIS AMENDMENT WILL SAVE $100 BILLION IN 10 YEARS. NEARLY $20 BILLION FOR…

    THIS AMENDMENT WILL SAVE $100 BILLION IN 10 YEARS. NEARLY $20 BILLION FOR THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND NEARLY $08 BILLION FOR THE AMERICAN CONSUMERS.

    Show Full Text
  • 05:49:20 PM

    MR. BEGICH

    THIS HEALTH CARE BILL IS ALL ABOUT. IT'S NOT ONLY ABOUT GETTING QUALITY…

    THIS HEALTH CARE BILL IS ALL ABOUT. IT'S NOT ONLY ABOUT GETTING QUALITY CARE, IT IS ABOUT FINDING OPPORTUNITIES, AS WE HEARD ONE SENATOR TALKING ABOUT BENDING THE COST CURVE, IT'S IMPACTING THE CONSUMER IN A POSITIVE WAY BY $80 BILLION. THE OTHER THING I HEARD A LOT ON THE FLOOR THAT YOU TALKED QUICKLY ABOUT AND THAT IS THE CHAIN OF CONTROL. WHICH, YOU KNOW, I DROVE HERE 19 DAYS WITH MY FAMILY THROUGH CANADA, FIVE DAYS, WE BOUGHT SOME DRUGS, WE -- I HAD A COLD. I'M STILL HERE. I'M STANDING. I'M HEALTHY. TELL ME AGAIN. REMIND ME ABOUT THAT CHAIN OF CONTROL ON THESE DRUGS AN WHERE THESE PRODUCED.

    Show Full Text
  • 05:49:58 PM

    MR. DORGAN

    I'M LEARNING THAT AS A NEW MEMBER.

  • 05:50:22 PM

    MR. BEGICH

    AS A NEW MEMBER.

  • 05:50:25 PM

    MR. DORGAN

    MY COLLEAGUES SAID THIS IS ABOUT UNTESTED, UNREGULATED DRUGS COMING FROM…

    MY COLLEAGUES SAID THIS IS ABOUT UNTESTED, UNREGULATED DRUGS COMING FROM PARTS OF THE SOVIET UNION. THAT IS SO UNBELIEVABLE. IT'S NOT DESCRIBING AN AMENDMENT THAT I OFFERED. NOTHING ON THE FLOOR THAT I'M AWARE OF. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A CHAIN OF CUSTODY IDENTICAL TO THE U.S. WHEN THAT'S THE CASE, IF IT'S THE CASE, WHY WOULD THE AMERICAN PEOPLE NOT HAVE THE FREEDOM TO ACQUIRE THAT SAME DRUG WHEN IT'S SOLD AT 1-TETH OR 1 HALF THE PRICE?

    Show Full Text
  • 05:50:55 PM

    MR. BEGICH

    LA QUESTION. EVEN THOUGH WE DIDN'T ASK FOR A COLLOQUY, THIS IS KIND OF A…

    LA QUESTION. EVEN THOUGH WE DIDN'T ASK FOR A COLLOQUY, THIS IS KIND OF A COLLOQUY. I APPRECIATE THE BACK AND FORTH. THIS IS ONE REASON WHY I SUPPORT THIS BILL IS FOR ALL THE REASONS THAT YOU LAID OUT, THE CONTROL IS THERE THE PROTECTION FOR THE CONSUMER IS THERE. THE SAVINGS TO THE CONSUMER AND THE TAXPAYER ARE ENORMOUS. AS WE DEAL WITH THESE ISSUES. IF THERE'S ONE THING I HEARD OVER AND OVER AGAIN THROUGH E-MAILS AND CORRESPONDENCE TO MY OFFICE IS, HELP US SAVE ON PRESCRIPTION DRUGS. TO EMPHASIZE THAT POINT, AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I HAVE THE NUMBERS RIGHT, OVER 10 YEARS, FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO THE CONSUMER IT IS $100 BILLION.

    Show Full Text
  • 05:51:33 PM

    MR. DORGAN

    MR. PRESIDENT, THE SAVINGS IS $100 BILLION. I WANT THE PHARMACEUTICAL…

    MR. PRESIDENT, THE SAVINGS IS $100 BILLION. I WANT THE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY TO DO WELL, TO MAKE PROFITS, TO MAKE PRESCRIPTION DRUGS. I JUST WANT FAIR PRICING FOR THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. I DON'T HAVE A BEEF WITH THE INDUSTRY. I WANT THEM TO DO WELL. I WANT THEM, HOWEVER, TO GIVE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE FAIR PRICES BECAUSE WE ARE PAYING THE HIGHEST PRICE IN THE WORLD FOR BRAND NAME PRESCRIPTION DRUGS AND I THINK IT IS UNFAIR. THIS AMENDMENT WILL FIX THAT. THERE'S A COMPETING AMENDMENT THAT NULLIFIES IT. THAT SAYS ALL OF THIS WILL GO AWAY AND WE'RE DONE WITH THIS BILL AND NOTHING HAS HAPPENED FOUGHT THE BRAKES ON PRESCRIPTION DRUG PRICES. I HOPE MY COLLEAGUES WILL STAND WITH ME AND THE AMERICAN PEOPLE TO SAY THAT WE SUPPORT FAIR DRUG PRICES FOR THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GOING TO VOTE ON IN A FEW MINUTES. I APPRECIATE THE QUESTIONS FROM THE SENATOR FROM ALASKA.

    Show Full Text
  • 05:52:20 PM

    MR. BEGICH

    MR. PRESIDENT, THANK YOU TO THE SENATOR FROM NORTH DAKOTA FOR THE…

    MR. PRESIDENT, THANK YOU TO THE SENATOR FROM NORTH DAKOTA FOR THE CLARIFICATION ON THE QUESTIONS AND HOW IMPORTANT THIS IS TO THOSE IN ALASKA.

    Show Full Text
  • 05:52:31 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    OFFICER: THE SENATOR'S TIME HAS EXPIRED. THE SENATOR FROM MONTANA.

  • 05:52:39 PM

    MR. BAUCUS

    IN ADDITION TO.

  • 05:52:58 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THANK YOU.

  • 05:53:01 PM

    MR. BAUCUS

    YOU.

  • 05:53:02 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THE SENATOR FROM MONTANA HAS FIVE MINUTES REMAINING.

  • 05:53:07 PM

    MR. BAUCUS

    FIVE MINUTES PLUS ONE MINUTE.

  • 05:53:14 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    FIVE MINUTES PLUS ONE MINUTE.

  • 05:53:17 PM

    MR. BAUCUS

    EQUALLY DIVIDED. THANK YOU. MR. PRESIDENT, I JUST WANT TO MAKE IT AS CLEAR…

    EQUALLY DIVIDED. THANK YOU. MR. PRESIDENT, I JUST WANT TO MAKE IT AS CLEAR AS I CAN, THAT THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE ESSENTIALLY SAYS THEIR PREMIUMS WILL GO DOWN FOR ABOUT 93% OF AMERICANS. I SAY THAT BECAUSE MY GOOD FRIEND FROM IDAHO, I THINK WAS LEAVING A DIFFERENT IMPRESSION. LET ME SUMMARIZE WHAT C.B.O. SAYS. AND I PUT A CHART THAT WILL BE PROVIDED IN THE RECORD, BUT UNDER THE SENATE RULES, WE CAN'T PUT CHARTS IN THE RECORD. I'M GOING TO SUMMARIZE WHAT THIS CHART SAYS. 70% OF AMERICANS GET THEIR HEALTH INSURANCE FROM THE LARGE GROUP MARKET. THAT IS, PEOPLE WORK FOR LARGER EMPLOYERS. 70%. AND C.B.O. SAID FOR THAT 70% OF AMERICANS, PREMIUMS WILL GO DOWN A LITTLE BIT. THAT UP TO ABOUT 3% REDUCTION OF PREMIUMS. THE NEXT GROUP OF AMERICANS WHO GET HEALTH INSURANCE, IT'S CALLED THE SMALL GROUP MARKET. THAT IS SMALL COMPANIES, SMALL BUSINESS. THAT IS 13% OF AMERICANS GET THEIR HEALTH INSURANCE. C.B.O. SAYS FOR THAT 13% THAT IT WILL BE MAYBE PREMIUMS WILL GO UP BETWEEN 1% OR DOWN 2% OVERALL, BUT FOR THOSE FOLKS WHO GET SMALL BUSINESS PEOPLE WHO GET TAX CREDITS, AND THERE'S VERY SIGNIFICANT TAX CREDITS IN THIS BILL, AND I THINK THEY'LL BE EVEN MORE SIGNIFICANT WHEN THE MANAGERS' AMENDMENT IS UP. C.B.O. SAID WITH MODEST TAX CREDITS THOSE PREMIUMS WILL GO DOWN 8% TO 11%, AS 13% OF AMERICANS WHO HAVE INSURANCE, THOSE PREMIUMS WILL GO DOWN 8% TO 11% AMONG THOSE WHO HAVE CREDIT. LOOK AT WHAT'S CALLED THE NONGROUP MARKET, INDIVIDUAL MARKET, THAT'S 17% OF AMERICANS. FOR THOSE FOLKS, IF YOU COMPARE THEIR CURRENT INSURANCE WITH THE -- WHAT THEY'LL HAVE IN THE FUTURE, THOSE PREMIUMS WILL GO DOWN 14% TO 20% DOWN, ACCORDING TO THE C.B.O. ININ ADDITION, C.B.O. SAYS THAT PERSONS WHO HAVE TAX CREDITS, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE INDIVIDUAL MARKET, THOSE PEOPLE WILL FIND ON AVERAGE THEIR PREMIUMS WILL GO DOWN 56% TO 59%. REMEMBER, 17% AMERICANS BUY INSURANCE INDIVIDUALLY. THAT 17%, 10% BECAUSE OF TAX CREDITS IN THIS BILL WILL FIND THEIR PREMIUMS GO DOWN 56% TO 59%. THE 7% REMAINING -- REMEMBER I SAID 93% REDUCTION. THE 7% REMAINING WILL FIND THAT BECAUSE OF BETTER BENEFITS THEIR PREMIUMS WILL GO UP 10% TO 13%, BUT THEY'LL HAVE A LOT BETTER BENEFITS. A LOT HIGHER QUALITY INSURANCE THAN THEY'LL HAVE TODAY. FRANKLY, MY JUDGMENT IS THAT THE QUALITY -- HIGHER QUALITY OF INSURANCE THEY HAVE, BECAUSE OF THIS LEGISLATION, WILL OUTWEIGH THE INCREASE IN THE PREMIUMS. BUT ANYWAY, 93% PREMIUMS WILL GO DOWN. MR. PRESIDENT, LET ME JUST SPEAK A LITTLE BIT ON MY AMENDMENT WHICH AS I UNDERSTAND COULD BE THE FIRST AMENDMENT VOTED ON. REMIND MY COLLEAGUES THAT THIS IS A TAX CUT BILL, IT CUTS TAXES. IT CUTS TAXES VERY SIGNIFICANTLY. OVER THE NEXT 10 YEARS, THIS BILL WILL PROVIDE AMERICANS A A $441 BILLION TAX CUT TO BUY HEALTH INSURANCE. $441 BILLION IN TAX CREDITS TO BUY HEALTH INSURANCE. CREDITS OR TAX REDUCTIONS. IN THE YEAR 2017, TAXPAYERS EARN BY DZ 20DZ THOUSAND TO -- $20,000 TO $30,000 WILL SEE AN AVERAGE TAX CUT OF 30%. THEY WILL SEE AN AVERAGE TAX CUT OF 37%. THAT IS FROM THE JOINT COMMITTEE ON TAX. IN ADDITION TWO YEARS LATER THE AVERAGE TAXPAYER MAKING LESS THAN $75,000 A YEAR WILL RECEIVE A TAX CREDIT OF $1,500. JUST TO REPEAT, THE AVERAGE TAXPAYER MAKING LESS THAN $7,500 A YEAR WILL RECEIVE A TAX REDUCTION OR A TAX CREDIT OF MORE THAN $1,500. THE CRAPO MOTION IS AN ATTEMPT TO KILL HEALTH CARE REFORM. IT IS TO KEEP AMERICANS FROM GETTING THESE TAX CUTS. I THINK WE WANT AMERICANS TO GET THE TAX CUTS. IN THE CRAPO MOTION IS SUCCESSFUL, THE PEOPLE WILL NOT GET THE TAX CUTS. I THINK WE SHOULD REJECT THIS PROCEDURAL MANEUVER DESIGNED TO KILL TAX CUTS IN THIS HEALTH CARE BILL. AND THAT'S WHAT MY SIDE-BY-SIDE AMENDMENT SAYS, AND THAT IS THE FIRST AMENDMENT, THAT IS, LET'S VOTE TO KEEP THE CURRENT TAX CUTS AND I URGE MY -- A VOTE ON THAT POSITIVE AND A VOTE NO ON THE CRAPO WHICH IS -- WHICH ELIMINATES THE TAX CUTS THAT'S NOT WHAT I THINK MOST AMERICANS WANT. I URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO VOTE FOR THE SIDE SIDE-BY-SIDE AMENDMENT. MR. PRESIDENT, I YIELD THE FLOOR.

    Show Full Text
  • 05:58:10 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THE SENATOR FROM

  • 05:58:24 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT THAT MY REMARKS ON THIS LEGISLATION BE PRINTED AT…

    I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT THAT MY REMARKS ON THIS LEGISLATION BE PRINTED AT THIS POINT IN THE RECORD.

    Show Full Text
  • 05:58:35 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    WITHOUT OBJECTION.

  • 05:58:53 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    PRESIDING OFFICER: THE SENATOR FROM IDAHO. A SENATOR: MR. PRESIDENT, I'LL…

    PRESIDING OFFICER: THE SENATOR FROM IDAHO. A SENATOR: MR. PRESIDENT, I'LL JUST TAKE ONE MINUTE ON THIS AND I THINK WE'RE READY TO VOTE.

    Show Full Text
  • 05:59:03 PM

    MR. CRAPO

    TWO CONTRASTING AMENDMENTS HERE. THE SENATOR FROM MONTANA INDICATED THAT…

    TWO CONTRASTING AMENDMENTS HERE. THE SENATOR FROM MONTANA INDICATED THAT MY AMENDMENT, WHICH SIMPLY ASKS THE FINANCE COMMITTEE TO MAKE THIS BILL COMPLY WITH THE PRESIDENT'S PLEDGE, WOULD SOMEHOW KILL THE BILL. THAT'S NOT AT ALL TRUE. AND, SECONDLY, THAT IT WOULD STOP THE TAX RELIEF IN THE BILL THAT THE SENATOR FROM MONTANA HAS IDENTIFIED, THE REFUNDABLE TAX KRUTS. THE BOTTOM LINE IS -- CREDITS. THE POP LINE IS THAT -- THE BOTTOM LINE IS THAT ALL MY AMENDMENT DOES IS SAY, LET'S HAVE THE PRESIDENT'S PLEDGE TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE HONORED IN THIS LEGISLATION. LET'S TAKE OUT THE TAXES THAT 73 MILLION AMERICAN HOUSEHOLDS WILL SAY UNDER THIS LEGISLATION. HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF NEW TAXES. A SENATOR: MR. PRESIDENT?

    Show Full Text
  • 05:59:50 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    PRESIDING OFFICER: THE SENATOR FROM MONTANA.

  • 05:59:55 PM

    MR. BAUCUS

    THE CRAPO AMENDMENT IS A MOTION TO RECOMMIT THE -- THE UNDERLYING BILL,…

    THE CRAPO AMENDMENT IS A MOTION TO RECOMMIT THE -- THE UNDERLYING BILL, THE PENDING BILL TO THE FINANCE COMMITTEE, TAKE OUT ALL THE TAX CUTS.

    Show Full Text
  • 06:00:20 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    PRESIDING OFFICER: IS THERE A SUFFICIENT SECOND? THERE APPEARS TO BE. THE…

    PRESIDING OFFICER: IS THERE A SUFFICIENT SECOND? THERE APPEARS TO BE. THE CLERK WILL CALL THE ROLL. VOTE: A A VOTE:

    Show Full Text
  • 06:00:59 PM

    Senate Vote 375 - On the Amendment (Baucus Amdt No 3183)

    To protect middle class families from tax increases.

    Amendment Agreed to (97 - 1)
    Yea

    Vote Details: Yea - 96
    Republican - 39
    Democratic - 55
    Independent - 2

    Vote Details: Nay - 1
    Democratic - 1

    Vote Details: Not Voting - 2
    Republican - 1
    Democratic - 1

  • 06:26:32 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    OFFICER: IS THERE ANYONE WISHING TO VOTE OR CHANGE THEIR VOTE? HEARING…

    OFFICER: IS THERE ANYONE WISHING TO VOTE OR CHANGE THEIR VOTE? HEARING NONE, ON THIS VOTE, THE YEAS ARE 7, THE NAYS ARE 1. UNDER THE PREVIOUS ORDER REQUIRING 60 VOTES FOR THE ADOPTION OF THIS AMENDMENT, THE AMENDMENT IS AGREED TO.

    Show Full Text
  • 06:26:52 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THE PREVIOUS ORDER, THE MOTION TO RECONSIDER IS CONSIDERED MADE AND LAID…

    THE PREVIOUS ORDER, THE MOTION TO RECONSIDER IS CONSIDERED MADE AND LAID UPON THE TABLE. THE SENATE WILL BE IN ORDER. UNDER THE PREVIOUS ORDER, THERE WILL NOW BE TWO MINUTES OF DEBATE EQUALLY DIVIDED PRIOR TO A VOTE IN RELATION TO THE CRAPO MOTION TO COMMIT. THE SENATE WILL BE IN ORDER, PLEASE. TAKE YOUR CONVERSATIONS OUT OF THE WELL.

    Show Full Text
  • 06:27:23 PM

    MR. BAUCUS

    MADAM PRESIDENT?THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE SENATOR FROM IDAHO.

  • 06:27:36 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER:MADAM PRESIDEN

    THE SENATOR FROM IDAHO.

  • 06:27:37 PM

    MR. CRAPO

    MADAM PRESIDENT, THIS IS A VERY SIMPLE VOTE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE NOW. THIS…

    MADAM PRESIDENT, THIS IS A VERY SIMPLE VOTE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE NOW. THIS IS THE AMENDMENT THAT WILL CORRECT THE BILL TO COMPLY WITH THE PRESIDENT'S PROMISE NOT TO TAX ANYONE WHO MAKES OVER $200,000 AS AN INDIVIDUAL OR $250,000 AS A FAMILY. THE PREVIOUS VOTE WE JUST HAD, I THINK IT WAS A UNANIMOUS VOTE FOR IT, SIMPLY SAID TO TAKE THE TAX RELIEF OUT OF THE BILL. WE'VE HAD PLENTY DEBATES WHAT TAX RELIEF IS OR ISN'T IN THE BILL, BUT THIS IS THE VOTE THAT WILL SAY LET'S FIX THE BILL AND TAKE OUT

    Show Full Text
  • 06:28:09 PM

    MR. BAUCUS

    THE SENATOR FROM MONTANA.

  • 06:28:10 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THE SENATOR FROM MONTANA.

  • 06:28:11 PM

    MR. BAUCUS

    MADAM PRESIDENT, THE CRAPO MOTION TO COMMIT IS AN ATTEMPT TO KILL HEALTH…

    MADAM PRESIDENT, THE CRAPO MOTION TO COMMIT IS AN ATTEMPT TO KILL HEALTH CARE REFORM. IF IT SUCCEEDS, IT WILL KEEP 31 MILLION AMERICANS FROM GETTING HEALTH CARE COVERAGE. IF IT SUCCEEDS, IT WILL KEEP AMERICANS FROM GETTING THE TAX CUTS IN THIS BILL. IF THE CRAPO MOTION SUCCEEDS, OVER THE NEXT TEN YEARS, AMERICANS WILL GET $441 BILLION LESS IN TAX CREDITS TO BUY HEALTH INSURANCE. I URGE WE DO NOT VOTE IN FAVOR OF THE CRAPO MOTION. I ASK FOR THE YEAS AND NAYS.

    Show Full Text
  • 06:28:45 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    PRESIDING OFFICER: IS THERE A SUFFICIENT SECOND? THERE APPEARS TO BE. THE…

    PRESIDING OFFICER: IS THERE A SUFFICIENT SECOND? THERE APPEARS TO BE. THE CLERK WILL CALL THE ROLL. VOTE: VOTE:

    Show Full Text
  • 06:28:59 PM

    Senate Vote 376 - On the Motion (Crapo Motion to Commit HR 3590 to the Committee on Finance)

    Health care reform bill

    Motion Rejected (45 - 54)
    Yea
    Nay

    Vote Details: Yea - 45
    Republican - 40
    Democratic - 5

    Vote Details: Nay - 53
    Democratic - 51
    Independent - 2

  • 06:42:21 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    ARE THERE ANY SENATORS IN THE CHAMBER WISHING TO VOTE OR CHANGE THEIR…

    ARE THERE ANY SENATORS IN THE CHAMBER WISHING TO VOTE OR CHANGE THEIR VOTE? HEARING NONE, ON THIS VOTE, THE YEAS ARE 45, THE NAYS ARE 54. UNDER THE PREVIOUS ORDER REQUIRING 60 VOTES FOR THE ADOPTION OF THE THIS MOTION, THE MOTION IS WITHDRAWN. UNDER THE PREVIOUS ORDER, THERE WILL NOW BE TWO MINUTES OF DEBATE EQUALLY DIVIDED PRIOR TO A VOTE IN RELATION TO AMENDMENT NUMBER 2793, AS MODIFIED, OFFERED BY THE SENATOR FROM NORTH DAKOTA, MR. DORGAN.

    Show Full Text
  • 06:43:03 PM

    MR. DORGAN

    MADAM PRESIDENT, THE SENATE IS NOT IN ORDER.

  • 06:43:06 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    OFFICER: THE SENATOR FROM NORTH DAKOTA.

  • 06:43:08 PM

    MR. DORGAN

    THE SENATE IS NOT IN ORDER.

  • 06:43:10 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THE SENATE WILL BE IN ORDER.

  • 06:43:14 PM

    MR. DORGAN

    PRESIDENT, THIS AMENDMENT IS ABOUT FAIR PRICING FOR PRESCRIPTION DRUGS FOR…

    PRESIDENT, THIS AMENDMENT IS ABOUT FAIR PRICING FOR PRESCRIPTION DRUGS FOR THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. A COLLEAGUE OF MINE JUST CAME UP TO ME AND SAID, MY DAUGHTER TAKES NEXIUM. COSTS HER $1,000 A MONTH. I SAID, WELL, I HAPPEN TO HAVE A CHART ABOUT NEXIUM HERE. THIS ILLUSTRATES BETTER THAN I KNOW HOW TO ILLUSTRATE THE DIFFERENCE IN PRICING. HERE'S WHAT NEXIUM COSTS. $424 WORTH OF NEXIUM IN THE UNITED STATES IS SOLD FOR $40 IN GREAT BRITAIN, $36 IN SPAIN, $37 IN GERMANY, $67 IN FRANCE. NOW, IF YOU LIKE THIS KIND OF PRICING WHERE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE PAY THE HIGHEST PRICES IN THE WORLD FOR PRESCRIPTION DRUGS, IF YOU LIKE THIS KIND OF PRICING, THEN YOU REALLY OUGHT TO VOTE AGAINST THIS AMENDMENT. BUT THIS AMENDMENT IS BIPARTISAN, REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS, OVER 30 MEMBERS OF THIS SENATE HAVE SUPPORTED THIS APPROACH, SAYING LET'S PROVIDE FAIR PRICING FOR A CHANGE FOR THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. WE SHOULDN'T BE PAYING THE HIGHEST PRICES IN THE WORLD FOR PRESCRIPTION DRUGS. ALL I ASK IS THAT YOU SUPPORT THIS AMENDMENT TO GIVE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR FAIR PRICING, FOR A CHANGE.

    Show Full Text
  • 06:44:20 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THE SENATOR FROM NEW JERSEY.

  • 06:44:24 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    OFFICER: THE SENATOR FROM NEW JERSEY.

  • 06:44:27 PM

    MR. MENENDEZ

    PRESIDENT, I RISE TO OPPOSE THE DORGAN AMENDMENT. LET'S BE CLEAR. THERE…

    PRESIDENT, I RISE TO OPPOSE THE DORGAN AMENDMENT. LET'S BE CLEAR. THERE ARE THOSE WHO WANT TO DID I MINIMIZE SAFETY. BUT THE ONE ENTITY IN THIS COUNTRY WHO'S SPHORLGT SAFETY OF FOOD AND DRUGS IS THE F.D.A. AND COMMISSIONER HAMBURG HAS MENTIONED IN HER LETTER OF ALL OF THE POTENTIAL RISKS OF THE DORGAN AMENDMENT. SECONDLY, WE'VE HEARD ABOUT THE EUROPEAN UNION, AS AN EXAMPLE OF WHY WE SHOULD PERMIT REIMPORTATION. WHAT DID WE HERE HEAR FROM THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITY LAST WEEK? THAT THIS JUST TWO MONTHS THEY SEIZED 34 MILLION FAKE TABLETS IN ALL MEMBER COUNTRIES AND THAT THIS WAS BEYOND THEIR GREATEST FEARS. THIRDLY,

    Show Full Text
  • 06:45:37 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THE SENATOR'S TIME HAS SPIRTED. THE SENATOR'S TIME HATS EXPIRED. -- THE…

    THE SENATOR'S TIME HAS SPIRTED. THE SENATOR'S TIME HATS EXPIRED. -- THE SENATOR'S TIME HAS EXPIRED. IS THERE A SUFFICIENT SECOND? THERE APPEARS TO BE. THE CLERK WILL CALL THE ROLL. VOTE: VOTE:

    Show Full Text
  • 06:45:53 PM

    Senate Vote 377 - On the Amendment (Dorgan Amdt No 2793)

    To provide for the importation of prescription drugs.

    Amendment Rejected (51 - 48)
    Yea
    Nay

    Vote Details: Yea - 50
    Republican - 23
    Democratic - 26
    Independent - 1

    Vote Details: Nay - 48
    Republican - 17
    Democratic - 30
    Independent - 1

  • 07:02:58 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THE SENATOR FROM NEW JERSEY.

  • 07:03:43 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THE SENATOR FROM NEW JERSEY.

  • 07:03:45 PM

    MR. LAUTENBERG

    MADAM PRESIDENT, MAY WE HAVE ORDER, PLEASE? THANK YOU. MADAM PRESIDENT,…

    MADAM PRESIDENT, MAY WE HAVE ORDER, PLEASE? THANK YOU. MADAM PRESIDENT, THIS -- THIS IS A SIMPLE SOLUTION TO A COMPLICATED PROBLEM. MY AMENDMENT CONTAINS THE DORGAN AMENDMENT, THE WORK THAT OUR FRIEND FROM NORTH DAKOTA IS SIGNIFICANT. BUT WHAT IT DID NOT HAVE IS A GUARANTEE, AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE, THAT THE PRODUCT WAS SAFE, THAT THERE WERE NO COUNTERFEITS, THAT THERE WERE NO MIXTURE OF THINGS THAT MIGHT NOT WORK -- WELL WITH OTHER DRUGS. AND IT -- AND IT ADDS A SIMPLE REQUIREMENT THAT IMPORTED DRUGS BE CERTIFIED AS SAFE BY THE HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES SECRETARY. SO I HOPE THAT WE'LL BE ABLE TO PASS THIS INCLUDING THE -- WHICH WILL INCLUDE THE DORGAN AMENDMENT AND MAKE SURE THAT THE PRODUCTS THAT GET HERE, NO MATTER WHAT THE PRICE COULD BE, IF IT'S NOT SAFE, IT'S WORTHLESS, AND WE WANT TO BE SURE THAT EVERY PRODUCT THAT REACHES OUR SHORE IS SAFE TO TAKE AND -- AND WILL OPERATE AT MORE REASONABLE COSTS.

    Show Full Text
  • 07:04:59 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THE SENATOR'S TIME IS EXPIRED. A SENATOR: MR. PRESIDENT?

  • 07:05:04 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THE SENATE'S NOT IN ORDER.

  • 07:05:11 PM

    MR. DORGAN

    IN ORDER.

  • 07:05:12 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THE SENATE WILL PLEASE BE IN ORDER. PLEASE TAKE YOUR CONVERSATIONS…

    THE SENATE WILL PLEASE BE IN ORDER. PLEASE TAKE YOUR CONVERSATIONS OUTSIDE. THE SENATOR FROM NORTH DAKOTA.

    Show Full Text
  • 07:05:22 PM

    MR. DORGAN

    PRESIDENT, WE'VE ALL SEEN THIS MOVIE BEFORE. WE'VE HAD THESE VOTES BEFORE.…

    PRESIDENT, WE'VE ALL SEEN THIS MOVIE BEFORE. WE'VE HAD THESE VOTES BEFORE. ALL I SAY IS THIS: THE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY FLEXES ITS MUSCLE AND DEFEATS AN AMENDMENT FOR FAIR PRICES, FAIR PRESCRIPTION DRUG PRICES FOR THE AMERICAN PEOPLE SO WE CAN KEEP PAYING THE HIGHEST PRICES IN THE WORLD AND THERE'S ANOTHER AMENDMENT OFFERED THAT SEEMS LIKE SOMETHING IS BEING DONE, WHEN, IN FACT, NOTHING IS BEING DONE, NOTHING WILL CHANGE. DO NOT VOTE FOR THIS AMENDMENT AND SAY YOU'VE DONE SOMETHING ABOUT THE PRICE OF PRESCRIPTION DRUGS BECAUSE CONSTITUENTS WILL KNOW BETTER. IF YOU BELIEVE AT THE END OF THE EVENING, WE SHOULD DO NOTHING, BY

    Show Full Text
  • 07:06:17 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THERE A SUFFICIENT SECOND? THERE APPEARS TO BE. THE ELECTRIC WILL CALL THE…

    THERE A SUFFICIENT SECOND? THERE APPEARS TO BE. THE ELECTRIC WILL CALL THE ROLL. -- THE CLERK WILL CALL THE -- ROLL. VOTE:

    Show Full Text
  • 07:06:23 PM

    Senate Vote 378 - On the Amendment (Lautenberg Amdt No 3156)

    To provide for the importation of prescription drugs.

    Amendment Rejected (56 - 43)
    Yea
    Nay

    Vote Details: Yea - 56
    Republican - 23
    Democratic - 32
    Independent - 1

    Vote Details: Nay - 42
    Republican - 17
    Democratic - 24
    Independent - 1

  • 07:23:03 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    ARE THERE ANY SENATORS WISHING TO VOTE OR TO CHANGE A VOTE? HEARING NONE,…

    ARE THERE ANY SENATORS WISHING TO VOTE OR TO CHANGE A VOTE? HEARING NONE, ON THIS VOTE THE YEAS ARE 56, THE NAYS ARE 43. UNDER THE PREVIOUS ORDER REQUIRING 60 VOTES FOR THE ADOPTION OF THIS AMENDMENT, THE AMENDMENT IS WITHDRAWN. THE SENATOR FROM TEXAS.

    Show Full Text
  • 07:23:25 PM

    MRS. HUTCHISON

    MR. PRESIDENT, I HAVE A MOTION AT THE DESK AND ASK THAT IT BE BROUGHT…

    MR. PRESIDENT, I HAVE A MOTION AT THE DESK AND ASK THAT IT BE BROUGHT FORWARD.

    Show Full Text
  • 07:23:31 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THE CLERK WILL REPORT THE MOTION.

  • 07:23:35 PM

    THE CLERK

    THE SENATOR FROM TEXAS, MRS. HUTCHISON, MOVES TO COMMIT THE BILL H.R. 3590…

    THE SENATOR FROM TEXAS, MRS. HUTCHISON, MOVES TO COMMIT THE BILL H.R. 3590 TO THE COMMITTEE ON FINANCE, WITH INSTRUCTIONS.

    Show Full Text
  • 07:23:44 PM

    MRS. HUTCHISON

    MR. PRESIDENT, I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT THAT THE READING OF THE MOTION BE…

    MR. PRESIDENT, I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT THAT THE READING OF THE MOTION BE DISPENSED WITH.

    Show Full Text
  • 07:23:48 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    OFFICER: WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO ORDERED.

  • 07:23:51 PM

    MRS. HUTCHISON

    MR. PRESIDENT, THIS IS A MOTION THAT SENATOR THUNE AND I ARE PUTTING…

    MR. PRESIDENT, THIS IS A MOTION THAT SENATOR THUNE AND I ARE PUTTING FORWARD, AND IT'S A VERY SIMPLE MOTION. I THINK A LOT OF PEOPLE DON'T REALIZE THAT THE TAXES IN THE BILL THAT WE ARE DISCUSSING ACTUALLY START IN ABOUT THREE WEEKS. THEY START IN JANUARY OF 2010. BUT THE EFFECTS OF THE BILL, WHATEVER THE PROPOSALS ARE GOING TO BE IN THE BILL, WHATEVER PROGRAMS ARE AVAILABLE, WILL REALLY NOT COME INTO PLAY UNTIL 2014. SO THE TAXES WILL START THIS NEXT YEAR, AND THEY WILL BE PAID FOR FOUR YEARS BEFORE ANY OF THE PROGRAMS THAT THE BILL IS SUPPOSED TO PUT FORWARD WILL BE THERE. SO THE AMENDMENT THAT SENATOR THUNE AND I ARE PUTTING FORWARD MERELY SAYS THAT THE TAXES START BEING COLLECTED WHEN THE BILL IS IMPLEMENTED. SO WHATEVER PROGRAMS ARE BEING OFFERED TO THE PEOPLE OF AMERICA, WHATEVER INSURANCE PROGRAMS, WHATEVER KINDS OF BENEFITS THAT THERE MIGHT BE IN THE BILL WOULD START AT THE SAME TIME AS THE TAXES START, SO YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BE PAYING TAXES BEFORE YOU HAVE ANY OPTIONS THAT YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO TAKE IN THIS BILL. SO IT'S SIMPLE, IT'S CLEAR. WE BELIEVE THAT IF YOU PAY TAXES FOR FOUR YEARS BEFORE YOU SEE ANY OF THE PROGRAMS IN THIS BILL, THAT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE CAN'T REALLY BE SURE THAT THERE WILL EVER BE A PROGRAM BECAUSE THERE WILL BE INTERVENING CONGRESSES AND AN INTERVENING PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION THAT WILL OCCUR BEFORE THIS BILL IS DESIGNED TO START. 2014. WE HAVE CONGRESSIONAL ELECTIONS IN 2010. WE HAVE A PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION PLUS CONGRESSIONAL ELECTIONS IN 2012. AND TWO YEARS FOLLOWING THAT, 2014, IS WHEN THIS BILL WILL BE IMPLEMENTED. SO REALLY, MR. PRESIDENT, I HOPE THAT EVERYONE WILL LOOK AT THIS AMENDMENT AND SUPPORT THE AMENDMENT THAT -- THAT WE'RE PUTTING FORWARD. IT'S A MOTION TO RECOMMIT THE BILL, TO FIX THIS ISSUE, THAT AMERICA SHOULD NOT BE LOOKING AT HIGHER DRUG PRICES, HIGHER MEDICAL DEVICE PRICES AND HIGHER COSTS OF INSURANCE, ALL OF WHICH ARE THE FIRST TAXES THAT WILL TAKE EFFECT. LET'S WALK THROUGH IT. STARTING NEXT YEAR, IN JANUARY, THREE WEEKS FROM TODAY, THERE WILL BE $22 BILLION IN TAXES ON PRESCRIPTION DRUG MANUFACTURERS THAT WILL START. $22 BILLION ON DRUG MANUFACTURERS. SO THE PRICE OF PRESCRIPTION DRUGS, ASPIRIN, ANYTHING THAT PEOPLE TAKE WILL GO UP BECAUSE THE DRUG MANUFACTURERS ARE GOING TO START PAYING A TAX. $19 BILLION IN TAXES ON MEDICAL DEVICE MANUFACTURERS, SO THE MEDICAL DEVICES THAT WE USE TO -- HEARING AIDS, THAT WE USE TO TREAT AILMENTS WILL START BEING TAXED TO THE TUNE OF OF $19 BILLION NEXT JANUARY. AND $60 BILLION ON INSURANCE COMPANIES STARTING NEXT MONTH. SO THAT'S ABOUT $100 BILLION IN TAXES THAT START IN ABOUT THREE WEEKS, SO THAT THE INSURANCE COMPANIES HAVE PROBABLY ALREADY PRICED IN THE GOASHZ -- IN THE GOATIONS THAT THEY ARE HAVING -- IN THE NEGLIGENCES NOW THAT THEY ARE HAVING WITH PEOPLE ABOUT THEIR PREMIUMS, I'M SURE THEY WILL BE LOCKED IN FOR A YEAR OR TWO OR THREE OR FOUR, AND THEREFORE THESE RISES IN INSURANCE PREMIUMS ARE PROBABLY PART OF THIS BILL THAT WE'RE DEALING WITH RIGHT NOW. $60 BILLION IN TAXES THAT WILL SURELY BE PASSED TO EVERY PERSON WHO HAS HEALTH CARE COVERAGE RIGHT NOW. SO MR. PRESIDENT, HERE WE ARE, HEALTH CARE REFORM THAT IS SUPPOSED TO BRING DOWN THE PRICE OF HEALTH CARE IN THIS COUNTRY SO THAT MORE PEOPLE CAN AFFORD IT, AND WHAT IS THE FIRST THING THAT WE DO? IT'S NOT OFFER A PLAN, IT'S NOT TO OFFER ANY KIND OF PROGRAM THAT WOULD HELP PEOPLE WHO ARE STRUGGLING RIGHT NOW BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE INSURANCE. IT'S CERTAINLY NOT GOING TO HELP PEOPLE WHO ARE STRUGGLING TO PAY THEIR PRESCRIPTION DRUG PRICES BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO RAISE THE PRICE BY TAXING THE MANUFACTURERS OF DRUGS, OF MEDICAL DEVICES AND THE COMPANIES THAT ARE GIVING INSURANCE TODAY. SO I THINK IT IS TIME THAT WE TALK ABOUT THE HIGH TAXES THAT ARE IN THIS BILL, AND WHAT WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT IN THE HUTCHISON-THUNE PROPOSAL, THE MOTION TO RECOMMIT, IS TO JUST SAY AT LEAST, THE VERY LEAST THAT WE COULD DO IS NOT ASK PEOPLE TO PAY TAXES FOR FOUR YEARS WHEN YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE THREE INTERVENING CONGRESSIONAL ELECTIONS BEFORE THIS BILL TAKES EFFECT. SO THINGS COULD CHANGE MIGHTILY, SO ALL THESE TAXES THAT ARE GOING TO GO INTO PLACE MIGHT NEVER BRING FORWARD THE PROPOSALS THAT ARE IN THE UNDERLYING BILL. IN 2013, ONE YEAR BEFORE THIS BILL IS TO TAKE EFFECT, THE TAXES ON HIGH-BENEFIT PLANS GO INTO EFFECT. NOW, WHAT IS A HIGH-BENEFIT PLAN? A HIGH-BENEFIT PLAN IS ONE THAT IS A REALLY GOOD PLAN. MANY UNIONS HAVE THESE AND MANY PEOPLE WHO WORK FOR BIG CORPORATIONS HAVE EVERYTHING PAID FOR. THEY HAVE THE -- ALL OF THE EMPLOYER REGULAR IN THE ORDER THAT MOST COMPANIES DO PAYMENTS, BUT THEY ALSO ALLOW IN THESE PLANS TO HAVE MOST OF THE DEDUCTIBLES ALSO PAID FOR. THEY'RE VERY GOOD PLANS. THIS BILL WILL EXCISE FOR THOSE PLANS $149 BILLION, JUST CUT IT RIGHT OUT, AND HAVE AN EXCISE TAX ON THOSE GOOD PLANS. $149 BILLION, AND THAT STARTS IN 2013. THAT'S ONE YEAR BEFORE THE BILL TAKES EFFECT. SO "SO IN 2013, ONE YEAR BEFORE THERE IS ANY NEW PLAN PUT FORWARD, THOSE WHO HAVE VERY GOOD COVERAGE, WHETHER IT BE SOMEONE WHO WORKS FOR A BIG COMPANY OR WHETHER IT'S A UNION MEMBER WILL START GETTING A 40% TAX ON THAT BENEFIT. SO ALL OF THE THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN NEGOTIATED ARE GOING TO HAVE A BIG 40% TAX. THAT STARTS IN 2013. IN ADDITION, IN 2013, ONE YEAR BEFORE THE BILL TAKES EFFECT, THERE IS A LIMITATION PUT ON ITEMIZED DEDUCTIONS FOR MEDICAL EXPENSES. NOW, TODAY IF YOU SPEND MORE THAN 7.5% OF YOUR INCOME ON MEDICAL EXPENSES, YOU GET TO DEDUCT EVERYTHING OVER THAT. SO IF YOU HAVE A CATASTROPHIC ACCIDENT OR YOU HAVE A VERY EXPENSIVE DISEASE TO TREAT OR YOU'RE IN A CLINICAL TRIAL, SOMETHING THAT'S REALLY EXPENSIVE, IF YOU GO ABOVE 7.5% OF YOUR INCOME, YOU CAN DEDUCT THAT. IN 2013, UNDER THE BILL THAT IS BEFORE US, YOU WOULD HAVE TO SPEND 10% OF YOUR INCOME BEFORE YOU COULD DEDUCT THOSE EXPENSES. THAT IS ANOTHER $15 BILLION THAT WILL BE COLLECTED IN TAXES THAT ARE NOT COLLECTED TODAY. THE NEW MEDICARE PAYROLL TAX WHICH IMPACTS INDIVIDUALS WHO EARN OVER $250,000 OR COUPLES WHO EARN $125,000 EACH WOULD TAKE EFFECT IN 2013. THAT'S $54 BILLION IN TAXES. SO THESE ARE ALL THE TAXES THAT TAKE EFFECT BEFORE THE BILL DOES DOES, BEFORE THERE'S ANY PLAN OFFERED. YOU WOULD HAVE THE TAX THAT STARTS NEXT MONTH ON INSURANCE COMPANIES, PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANIES, AND MEDICAL DEVICE COMPANIES, AND THEN IN 2013 YOU WOULD HAVE THE TAX ON HIGH-BENEFIT PLANS, 40% TAX ON THAT PLAN, AND THEN IN 2013, THE ITEMIZED DEDUCTIONS WILL NOT BE ALLOWED UNTIL YOU'VE PAID 10% OF YOUR SALARY IN MEDICAL EXPENSES. THE MEDICARE PAYROLL TAX, WHICH IS GOING TO IMPACT INDIVIDUALS, ALL OF THIS BEFORE THERE IS A PROGRAM IN PLACE. THEN IN 2014 WHEN THE BILL DOES COME FORWARD SO THAT THERE ARE PLANS TO BE OFFERED TO PEOPLE, THEN YOU START THE MANDATES ON EMPLOYERS AND THE TAXES IF PEOPLE RESIDENT COVERED. SO YOU HAVE $28 BILLION IN TAXES ON EMPLOYS THAT START IN 2014 AND THESE ARE THE EMPLOYERS THAT JUST CAN'T AFFORD TO GIVE HEALTH CARE TO THEIR EMPLOYEES OR THEY DON'T GIVE THE RIGHT KIND OF HEALTH CARE TO THEIR EMPLOYEES. SO IT'S NOT THE RIGHT PERCENTAGE PERCENTAGE. AND IF IT'S NOT THE RIGHT PERCENTAGE, THEN THE EMPLOYER PAYS A FEE OF $750,000 TO $3,000 PER EMPLOYEE. THAT'S THEIR FINE. AND THEN THERE IS THE TAX ON INDIVIDUALS WHO DON'T HAVE HEALTH INSURANCE AND THAT'S $750 PER ADULT. SO MY COLLEAGUE FROM SOUTH DAKOTA AND I WILL CERTAINLY WANT TO SPEND MORE TIME TALKING ABOUT THIS AND HOPE VERY MUCH THAT OUR COLLEAGUES WILL LOOK AT THIS. AND I DON'T THINK THIS IS WHAT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE THOUGHT THAT THEY WOULD BE GETTING IN HEALTH CARE REFORM. OF COURSE, WHAT WE WOULD HOPE THAT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WOULD GET IN HEALTH CARE REFORM WOULD BE LOWER COST OPTIONS THAT DON'T REQUIRE A BIG GOVERNMENT PLAN. THEY WOULDN'T REQUIRE BIG TAXES, THEY WOULDN'T REQUIRE BIG FEES. IF WE JUST HAD A LOWERING OF THE COST BY ALLOWING SMALL BUSINESSES TO HAVE BIGGER RISK POOLS, THAT WOULDN'T COST ANYTHING. IT JUST WOULD ALLOW BIGGER RISK POOLS THAT WOULD PROVIDE LOWER PREMIUMS AND EMPLOYERS WOULD BE ABLE TO OFFER MORE TO THEIR EMPLOYEES. MOST EMPLOYERS WANT TO OFFER HEALTH CARE TO THEIR EMPLOYEES. IT'S JUST A MATTER OF THE EXPENSE. AND THE BILL THAT WE'RE DEBATING NOW IS GOING TO GIVE MORE EXPENSES AND BURDENS ON EMPLOYERS AT THE TIME WHEN WE'RE ASKING THEM TO HIRE MORE PEOPLE TO GET US OUT OF THIS RECESSION. EVERYWHERE I GO IN TEXAS, WHEN I AM ON AN AIRPLANE, WHEN I AM IN A STORE, GROCERY STORE -- HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO DO ANY CHRISTMAS SHOPPING, I MUST ADMIT, SO I HAVEN'T BEEN IN A DEPARTMENT STORE, BUT THELESS, I DO -- BUT NEVERTHELESS, I DO GO TO THE GROCERY STORE -- SO I WILL SAY THAT EVERYONE I'M TALKING TO IS SAYING, I CAN'T AFFORD THIS, WHAT ARE YOU ALL DOING. AND I'M SAYING, OF COURSE, WELL, WE'RE TRYING TO STHOP BECAUSE TOP THIS BECAUSE WE AGREE WITH YOU, THAT SMALL BUSINESS CAN'T AFFORD THIS. I WAS A SMALL BUSINESS PERSON. I KNOW HOW HARD IT IS BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THE MARGINS OF BIG BUSINESS, AND IT IS VERY, VERY HARD TO MAKE ENDS MEET WHEN YOU HAVE ALL THE MANDATES AND THE TAXES AND WHEN YOU'RE TRYING TO INCREASE YOUR BUSINESS AND HIRE PEOPLE, WHICH IS WHAT WE WANT THEM TO DO, YOU CAN'T DO IT IF YOU ARE BURDENED WITH MORE AND MORE EXPENSES, AS THIS BILL WILL DO. SO WHAT SENATOR THUNE AND I ARE DOING IS MAKING A MOTION TO COMMIT THIS BILL BACK WITH INSTRUCTIONS TO COME BACK WITH THE CHANGES THAT WILL ASSURE THAT THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS BILL STARTS AND THAT WILL TRIGGER WHATEVER PROGRAMS ARE IN THE BILL AT THE SAME TIME AS WHATEVER TAXES AND FEES ARE GOING TO BE IN THIS BILL. NOW, I WOULD HOPE THAT THERE WOULD BE FEWER TAXES AND FEES, BUT WHATEVER YOUR VIEW IS ON THAT ISSUE, IT IS A MATTER OF SIMPLE FAIRNESS THAT YOU WOULDN'T START THE TAXES BEFORE YOU START THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROGRAM IT WOULD BE LIKE SAYING I WANT TO BUY A HOUSE AND THE REALTOR SAYS, WELL, FINE, YOU CAN START PAYING FOR THE HOUSE RIGHT NOW AND IN FOUR YEARS, YOU'LL BE ABLE TO MOVE IN IN. THE HOUSE MIGHT BE STRICKEN BY LIGHTNING, IT MIGHT FALL APART, IT MIGHT BLOW UP, IT MIGHT HAVE A FIRE, AND THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT COULD HAPPEN IN THIS BILL. THIS BILL MAY NOT MAKE IT FOR FOUR YEARS WHEN PEOPLE SEE WHAT'S IN IT. THERE WILL BE ELECTIONS. AND I JUST CANNOT IMAGINE THAT WE WOULD ESTABLISH A POLICY OF TAXING PEOPLE FOR FOUR YEARS, RAISING COSTS, LEADING DOWN THIS PATH THAT WILL EVENTUALLY GO TO A PUBLIC PLAN, THAT WILL END UP DOING WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY INTRODUCED IN THIS BILL AND THAT IS TO END UP WITH ONE PUBLIC PLAN. IT WILL TAKE A LITTLE LONGER THE WAY THE BILL IS BEING RECONFIGURED, BUT IT IS GOING TO END UP IN THE SAME PLACE UNLESS WE CAN STOP IT BY SHOWING PEOPLE THAT THE MANDATES AND THE TAXES ARE NOT GOOD FOR OUR ECONOMY AND THEY'RE NOT GOOD FOR THE HEALTH CARE SYSTEM THAT WE KNOW IN THIS COUNTRY. BECAUSE WE HAVE CHOICES IN THIS COUNTRY. WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO DECIDE WHO OUR DOCTOR IS AND WHAT INSURANCE COVERAGE WE WANT, WHEN WE WANT A HIGH DEDUCTIBLE OR A LOW DEDUCTIBLE. AND THAT'S NOT A CHOICE THAT SHOULD BE TAXED. WE SHOULDN'T HAVE SOMEONE TELL US WHAT PROCEDURES WE CAN HAVE. WE SHOULD HAVE THE OPTION OF DECIDING THAT FOR OURSELVES WITH OUR DOCTORS. AND THAT'S WHAT WE WANT IN HEALTH CARE REFORM. BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT'S IN THE BILL BEFORE US, MR. PRESIDENT. SO I HOPE WE CAN DISCUSS THE HUTCHISON-THUNE MOTION TO COMMIT. WE'RE GOING TO WORK TO TRY TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYONE KNOWS WE WANT FAIRNESS IN THIS BILL SO THAT PEOPLE KNOW WHAT'S IN IT. AND I HOPE WE WILL GET WHATEVER THE NEW VERSION OF THE BILL IS VERY SOON SO THAT WE WILL HAVE A CHANCE TO -- TO SEE, MAYBE THERE ARE SOME CHANGES THAT ARE BEING MADE. BUT IN THE BILL BEFORE US, THE TAXES START NEXT MONTH AND THE BILL IS IMPLEMENTED IN 2014, AND ON ITS FAIR, THAT'S FUNDAMENTALLY UNFAIR. AND I HOPE OUR AMENDMENT IS ADOPTED SO WE CAN CHANGE IT. THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. AND I YIELD THE FLOOR. I SUGGEST THE ABSENCE OF A QUORUM.

    Show Full Text
  • 07:40:53 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THE SENATOR FROM ARKANSAS.

  • 07:46:28 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    OFFICER: THE SENATOR FROM ARKANSAS.

  • 07:46:29 PM

    MR. PRYOR

    I ASK THAT THE QUORUM BE DISPENSED WITH.

  • 07:46:31 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    PRESIDING OFFICER: WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO ORDERED.

  • 07:46:33 PM

    MR. PRYOR

    MR. PRESIDENT, I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT THAT THE MAJORITY LEADER BE…

    MR. PRESIDENT, I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT THAT THE MAJORITY LEADER BE AUTHORIZED TO SIGN ANY DULY ENROLLED BILL AND JOINT RESOLUTION TODAY, DECEMBER 15.

    Show Full Text
  • 07:46:42 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    I SUGGEST THE ABSENCE OF A QUORUM.

  • 07:46:45 PM

    MR. PRYOR

    I SUGGEST THE ABSENCE OF A QUORUM.

  • 07:46:47 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

  • 07:47:03 PM

    Quorum Call

  • 07:54:36 PM

    MR. PRYOR

    THE SENATOR FROM ARKANSAS.

  • 07:54:37 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    THE SENATOR FROM ARKANSAS.

  • 07:54:39 PM

    MR. PRYOR

    WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO ORDERED.

  • 07:54:41 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    PRESIDING OFFICER: WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO ORDERED.

  • 07:54:43 PM

    MR. PRYOR

    I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT THAT THE SENATE PROCEED TO THE IMMEDIATE…

    I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT THAT THE SENATE PROCEED TO THE IMMEDIATE CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 4154, JUST RECEIVED FROM THE HOUSE AND AT THE DESK, THAT THE BAUCUS SUBSTITUTE AMENDMENT BE CONSIDERED AND AGREED TO, THE BILL, AS AMENDED, BE READ THREE TIMES, PASSED, AND THE MOTION TO RECONSIDER BE LAID ON THE TABLE, THAT ANY STATEMENTS RELATING TO THE MEASURE APPEAR AT THE APPROPRIATE PLACE IN THE RECORD AS IF READ, AND WITHOUT FURTHER INTERVENING ACTION OR DEBATE. BUT, MR. PRESIDENT, I UNDERSTAND THAT THE REPUBLICAN LEADER WILL OBJECT, SO I WILL WITHDRAW THIS REQUEST.

    Show Full Text
  • 07:55:20 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    PRESIDING OFFICER: THE QUESTION IS WITHDRAWN.

  • 07:55:24 PM

    MR. PRYOR

    MR. PRESIDENT, I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT THE SENATE PROCEED TO A PERIOD OF…

    MR. PRESIDENT, I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT THE SENATE PROCEED TO A PERIOD OF MORNING BUSINESS WITH THE SENATORS PERMITTED TO SPEAK FOR UP TO 10 MINUTES EACH.

    Show Full Text
  • 07:55:32 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    PRESIDING OFFICER: WITHOUT OBJECTION. SO ORDERED.

  • 07:55:36 PM

    MR. PRYOR

    WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO ORDERED.

  • 07:56:11 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

    WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO ORDERED.

  • 07:56:13 PM

    MR. PRYOR

    MR. PRESIDENT, WE EXPECT VOTES TOMORROW IN RELATION TO THE HUTCHISON…

    MR. PRESIDENT, WE EXPECT VOTES TOMORROW IN RELATION TO THE HUTCHISON AMENDMENT TO COMMIT -- EXCUSE ME, THE HUTCHISON MOTION TO COMMIT REGARDING TAXES AND IMPLEMENTATION AND THE SANDERS AMENDMENT REGARDING THE NATIONAL SINGLE-PAYER SYSTEM. SENATORS WILL BE NOTIFIED WHEN ANY VOTES ARE SCHEDULED. IF THERE IS NO FURTHER BUSINESS TO COME BEFORE THE SENATE, I ASK THAT IT ADJOURN UNDER THE PREVIOUS ORDER.

    Show Full Text
  • 07:56:41 PM

    THE PRESIDING OFFICER

Statistics

115th Congress - Senate
Total Hours: 1806 (After 566 days)
  • Debate1085 Hours
  • Quorum Calls425 Hours
  • Votes296 Hours

Click a category within the legend to toggle its visibility.

Source: Resume of Congressional Activity (senate.gov)