Hire More Heroes Act of 2013 -- Motion to Proceed -- Continued

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, I come to the floor this afternoon to talk about the health care law. I have visited with people in my home State of Wyoming and people from around the country who come to Washington, and many of them want to talk about the health care law and the side effects of the health care law. They want to talk about the health care law that the Democrats voted for unanimously in this body and Democrats on the other side of this building voted for overwhelmingly.

A little earlier today, one of my colleagues who is a supporter of the law came to the floor to say it is working and everything is great.

I am here to say it is not and to dispute some of the comments made by my colleague because I am hearing from people whose care has been affected. Their lives have been affected, the ability to keep their doctor has been affected, and the cost of their care and the cost of their insurance has gone up. Many have had their insurance canceled all because of the health care law.

One of the things the President promised the American people with the health care law--he said it would lower the cost of care, and people's premiums would go down $2,500 per family. He said he wanted to go after this because health care spending was too high in the country, and the spending was going up. Yet we had a colleague say that the health care law is a success.

On May 5, just a few days ago, USA Today had a headline that said ``Health Spending Up Most Since '80.'' Health spending is up. The President said it was going to go down because of his law, but it is up the most since 1980.

The article says:

Health care spending rose at the fastest pace since 1980 during the first three months of the year .....

They say that ``Health care spending climbed at a 9.9% annual rate last quarter''--almost 10 percent. That is not what President Obama told the American people would happen.

I would point out that this is a drastic increase in spending when the health care law was supposed to do just the opposite.

The Bureau of Economic Analysis reports higher spending in hospitals--the largest rise since the 1980's third-quarter. It is astonishing when the President promises the American people one thing and delivers another.

In this same Monday USA Today there is a Pew Research Center poll which is interesting. When you read about this, it says:

The poll of 1,501 adults, including 1,162 registered voters, was taken April 23-27 ..... Other findings help explain the Democrats' woes. By more than 2-1, Americans are dissatisfied with the direction of the country. They remain downbeat about the economy. They aren't persuaded that the Affordable Care Act is going to help them and their families. Even the president's supporters worry he is a political liability for fellow Democrats.

I come to the floor today as a doctor who has taken care of patients for 25 years in Wyoming, and my concern with health care is actually ``care.'' The President became fixated, as did the Democrats, on the word ``coverage.'' Coverage doesn't actually make sure that people get the care they need from a doctor they choose at a lower cost. That is what people wanted with the health care law. They don't want what was pushed down their throats by the Democrats in the House and the Senate who said they knew better than the American people.

I find it fascinating to see that in States run by Democrats around the country--Maryland, Oregon, and Massachusetts--which have had the exchanges and have given up. They have said, no, our State exchanges don't work and can't work. Massachusetts has been in play for a number of years, and they had to shut it down and turn it over to the Federal Government because of the mandates and complexities of the health care law--hundreds of millions of dollars that should have gone to care for people. It should have gone to help people. Instead it has gone to consultants and computer companies. It is not helping people. It is wasted.

Massachusetts, Oregon, and Maryland have given up. They said: We can't even live under this health care law's mandates. Our computer systems don't work. So let's turn it over to Washington. The American people are fed up with turning things over to Washington.

It was interesting to hear my colleague from Connecticut talk about some of the concerns and stories that we are sharing with the American people about folks losing their jobs, part of their pay, and bringing home smaller paychecks as a result of fewer hours at work.

I would like to share a situation that is now happening in Iowa. It was reported a couple of weeks ago in the Ottumwa Courier. Iowa is a State where we have a Democratic Senator from Iowa who is a very active supporter of the health care law. He was on the floor day after day about how wonderful this health care law was during the debate.

Let's talk about what is happening in one community in that Senator's home State in Eddyville. It says:

Faced with a nearly $138,000 increase in insurance costs the Eddyville-Blakesburg-Fremont School Board--

We are not talking about a business here; we are talking about a community school board--

this week approved reducing the hours of all para-educators from about 37 to just 29 hours per week to avoid the requirements of the National Health Care Act.

That is a side effect of the Obama health care law that every Democrat in this Chamber voted for when that came up for a vote.

So they had some meetings.

The article goes on and says:

In February, Superintendent Dean Cook recommended cutting 12 special education para-educators and three more working as librarians.

My colleague from Connecticut said none of this is happening and that these are just incidental stories; don't pay attention to them.

The article goes on to say:

However, this week his recommendation instead was a choice of either cutting eight para-educators or to reduce the hours of all of para-educators (around 25 to 28 employees), for the 2013-14 school year.

One of the board members ``opted to reduce hours instead of cutting jobs.'' This is a tough situation to put a school board in--reducing hours and cutting jobs.

The board member noted:

It just gets pretty tight when we have cut paras in the past. Those people play key roles in running the schools.

The article goes on:

In fact, several teachers spoke to or wrote letters to the board, providing a detailed account of the jobs that para-educators perform, urging the board not to cut these positions.

The article quotes one of the members of the board, Gay Murphy, who said: ``I feel very frustrated that our hands are tied with the health care act.'' Fascinating. The board member has the same last name as the Senator who was down here on the floor saying: Oh, no; pay no attention to these important stories.

The article goes on to say that Gay Murphy ``asked that employees' hours be cut by working less days instead of less hours per day''--but still cut the hours under the President's health care law--``so it would be easier for employees to get a second job if needed.''

The President's health care law is cutting people's hours, and they are trying to find ways to make it easier for them to get a second job because their paychecks are being cut. Their take-home pay is being cut because of this health care law.

One other board member ``noted that quality employees may not stick around for a 29-hour per week job and that special education students have a need for more consistency that comes with full-time employees.''

This is a sad story, and it is happening in communities all across the country. I think it is not a surprise that Republicans continue to come to the floor to say there are huge side effects of the health care law, and for some people who may have been helped by the law, many people are being hurt, and it is happening all across the country.

That is why when I heard my colleague mention on the floor that people are getting used to it or there is an acceptance of the health care law, I would just point out an article in the Washington Post:

Poll: Obamacare hits new low.

A new poll shows the public's opposition to Obamacare has never been higher.

The Pew Research Center poll shows disapproval of the law hitting a new high of 55 percent. It comes on the heels of several polls last week that showed the law had very little, if any, bump after signups on the health care exchanges exceeded the goals.

So here we are, an all-time low for approval of a health care law, and the reason is because people's lives have been impacted. They have been hurt by this health care law. There are side effects of the law. People who were promised they would be able to keep the coverage they had--millions lost that coverage. They were told they could keep their doctor if they wanted to keep their doctor, and many Americans lost their doctor. They were told the cost of their insurance would go down and it has instead gone up. They are paying higher premiums, higher deductibles, and now people's paychecks are shrinking and their take-home pay is less because of a health care law that remains very unpopular.

That is why I felt compelled to come to the floor to point out to the American people, and to this body, that comments made previously by a colleague were not, at least in my opinion, based on what I have seen, heard, and read, consistent with the real impacts of this health care law and the impacts on patients, on providers, and on taxpayers.

Thank you, Mr. President. I yield the floor and I suggest the absence of a quorum.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source