July 16,2008

Grassley floor speech on vote to sustain the President’s veto of the Medicare bill

Floor Statement of U.S. Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa
Ranking Member of the Committee on Finance
Vote to Sustain the President's Veto of H.R.6331, the Medicare bill
Tuesday, July 15, 2008

Mr. President, it is a very unfortunate and disappointing set of circumstances that got usto the point we are in today. I want to make very clear where we stand on the physician fix.There is widespread Republican support to block the 10.6 percent reduction in physician feesand replace it with a 1.1 percent update. I introduced S. 3118 on June 11 with SenatorsMcConnell and Kyl and others to do just that. In fact, the doctors would not be getting a 1.1percent update in this bill if it had not been for Republicans who announced support for thehigher update.

Mr. President, everything that I've been trying to do is to get to a bipartisan solution thatwould avoid a veto and avoid the pay cut from going into effect even for a short time. But theother side decided to play politics with this issue. They ran the clock right up to the deadline andthen refused to agree to an extension to keep the cut from going into effect. They repeatedlyobjected to an extension even though the Senate had passed 28 extensions on other matters justduring this session alone. And, to my absolute amazement, the Majority Leader said thatRepublicans had been given months to work out a Medicare bill so that was why no amendmentswould be allowed. The fact is that Republicans and Democrats had been working together formonths until the Democratic leadership pulled the rug right out from under that effort.

Let's review the facts here. At the end of last year, we agreed to a short-term Medicareextension so that we could complete work on a bipartisan Medicare package this year. We werevery close to a deal then and needed time to finish that work. Both sides agreed we would workquickly to get a bill that could be signed into law. Unfortunately, that effort has beenintentionally derailed by the Majority's desire to play politics with Medicare.

The fact is that the Majority has twice walked away from good faith bipartisannegotiations. The fact is that we had been working for months before they pulled the plug. Thefact is that we had actually completed that bipartisan deal two weeks ago. It was a deal thatwould get signed into law, not vetoed. But the other side thought they saw a political advantageand they've taken it. They scuttled that deal in favor of a bill that would get vetoed. So it's a biton the laughable side to blame us for failed negotiations that they seem to have intentionallysabotaged.

Mr. President, the fact is that the other side is more than willing to play politics with thisissue. I believe that has been the wrong approach. It was not the approach I took as Chairman ofthe Finance Committee. It was not the approach that Republicans took while we were in theMajority. Playing this kind of brinksmanship politics with Medicare and with people lives is notwhat we should be doing around here.

I also warned the White House early on in this debate that their position on private fee forservice was not defensible. As Republicans, we should not support the idea of allowing privateplans to use government-set payment rates. The basic premise of Medicare Advantage is that theprivate sector can do a better job than government in delivering health benefits to seniors. Whenwe allow those private plans to force providers to accept the government rates, we undermine thephilosophy behind the Medicare Advantage program. When we do that, we've conceded defeatup front.

Mr. President, the fact is that there are some serious problems with this bill. I think thebill has some significant flaws that need to be addressed. I'm going to be looking foropportunities to fix this bill and look forward to coming to the floor to do so.

As I've said before, I know the other side wants to argue that Republicans are onlyfighting this fight to protect Medicare Advantage plans. That's a good soundbite, but it's simplynot true. I, for one, could live with some Medicare Advantage reforms. There would have beenmore than enough Republicans who would support more reforms, if the Democrats had beenwilling to make changes in other areas. So let's talk about some of the problems that would havebeen fixed if this had been a truly bipartisan process.

First and foremost, if this bill becomes law, it will do serious harm to the Medicare drugbenefit that millions of seniors have come to depend on. It would tie the hands of the MedicarePart D plans resulting in higher drug prices and higher premiums on seniors. Medicare's Officeof the Actuary concluded that it will raise Part D drug costs And outside analysts have likewiseconcluded that this provision has the potential to undermine the long-term financialsustainability of the Medicare drug benefit.

This bill also includes entitlement expansions that are well-intentioned but ill-timed withthe pending insolvency of the program.

Let's spend a moment on what a truly bipartisan bill would have looked like. A trulybipartisan bill would have included much-needed assistance for the so-called “tweenerhospitals.” This is something myself and Senator Harkin consider a high priority because of thetweener hospitals we have across Iowa. A truly bipartisan bill would have included hospitalValue Based Purchasing in Medicare. A truly bipartisan bill would have included physicianpayment sunshine provisions that Senator Kohl and I have worked out together. A trulybipartisan bill wouldn't undermine the Medicare drug benefit and cause increased premiums onseniors.

Mr. President, the bill is riddled with problems and missed opportunities. But instead ofwriting a bipartisan bill, the Democrats twice walked away from the table and now here we are.They scuttled a deal that could have become law right away.

I believe I have shown myself willing to join in bipartisan efforts to solve major issues.We have health care reform and more Medicare bills in the future. But this process has calledinto question whether the other side is willing to start and stick with a truly bipartisan effort.The process that has been followed on this bill has done a great disservice to the Senate. Butmore than that, it does a disservice to seniors, doctors and everyone who depends on Medicare. Iwould hope that the other side will not take us down this path again. Bipartisanship is more thanlip service. It requires action and sometimes difficult choices. Compromise is not easy work.

But if you want to tackle the big issues that are ahead of us, then it will require a better processthan the one followed to produce this bill. To my colleagues today, that is the full story on thisvote today. I yield the floor.