Health began to decline, mary helped her mom move to a nursing home where she could access the higher level of care that she needed. Mary and her husband work full time, they still have children at home. Marchry i visited mary i visited the nursing home where mary spoke and she got emotional when she told me that if it werent for medicaid, her family wouldnt have any other way to pay for her mothers care. She doesnt know how she would care for her mom or what would happen to her. Chris anne, marys mornings is worried, too. She spoke at this roundtable at the nursing home. Shes worried about how the republican plan will affect her own future and others in similar situations in Nursing Homes. Nursing home 64 of americans in Nursing Homes have their care paid for by medicaid. Chris ann told me that this plan is not about take care of people but systemly, quote but simply, quote, survival of the fittest, unquote. Is that really the Health Care System that we support here in the United States of america, survival of the fittest . How about chuck. Chuck is a c. E. O. Of perm health, it is a rural hospital doing really innovative work in kind of northwest minnesota. Its kind of central north its in rural minnesota, not unlike the rural areas in the presiding officers state. Chuck told me that, quote, a cutting cutting medicaid as drastically as they are proposing will force us to cut staff in areas that are actually saving the system money today, unquote. These cuts would affect nurses that run the hospitals medical homes, Community Paramedics and other staff that are helping keep people out of the emergency department, and reduce readmissions and keep people healthy overall. This is part of the innovation that theyre doing there. This is part of the innovation that minnesota leads the nation in. Now, perm health is one of the largest employers in town, so taking away jobs doesnt just impact the patients and the hospital, it affects the community and rural economy. Cutting jobs and getting rid of successful reforms, that just doesnt make sense. And this would be repeated over and over and over again in rural america. So again the question is, why are republicans pursuing such a reckless and irresponsible strategy . All of the bills that they have proposed thus far will increase patient costs, including premiums and outofpocket cos costs; increase the number of uninsured americans; and rip apart our Health Care Safety n net. These are not the changes this americans want. In fact, this is the opposite of what americans want and are asking for. Now, over the last day we have heard a little bit more about a lot more about another path republicans may pursue, a scaledback plan that eliminates a handful of a. C. A. Provisions, including the employer mandate and individual mandate. While these two changes may be politically expedient, they would, according to the congressional budget office, drive up premiums and cause millions of americans to become uninsured. Whats more, as the New York Times points out, this plan does nothing nothing to address the criticisms that leader mcconnell, president trump, and their allies continue to lodge against the Affordable Care act. For example, this approach does nothing to improve competition and choice in the individual market and, in fact, injects far more uncertainty into individual Health Insurance markets, which are already rattled by the administrations deliberate efforts to sabotage them. Should this plan pass the senate, it will surely get much worse, when the differences between the plan in the house bill are reconciled in conference committee. According to news reports, a number of my republican colleagues arguing that passing this scaledback version of repeal is really just a means to get to conference, where members can further negotiate the house and Senate Repeal and replace bills. In fact, some are even suggesting that the provisions in the housepassed bill would be a guidepost for negotiations. Now, i think all of us remember how all of, farreaching, and according to president trump, mean mean the house bill the housepassed bill. And, whats more, we could see the worst provisions of the better care reconciliation act, the Senate Repeal and replace bill that was defeated on a bipartisan basis, resurface in the conference committee. Overall, pursuing this path is dangerous, given the tremendous number of unknowns, not only with this halfbaked thats being generous if quarterbaked, scaledback version of the a. C. A. Repeal, destabilize Health Insurance markets. It also serves as a vehicle for republicans to take up the most controversial measures, included in the defeated bcra and the housepassed bill. Why on earth why on earth would we support that . Frankly, i. T. Also delusional to think that a small group of house and Senate Leaders can craft a workable solution in a matter of days or weeks. They have had seven years to come up with an alternative. They dont have one. So how can we expect them to all of a sudden come umwa viable come up with a viable plan that affects onesixth of our economy . Look, this whole process has been and continues to be irresponsible. In fact, this is one of the most irresponsible policymaking processes i have seen in my time in the United States senate. What we should do is just what senator mccain called for in his speech yesterday pursue regular order, work together, republicans and democrats, and seek out compromise. If we reject this wrongheaded effort, then i and many of my colleagues are ready and committed to work in a bipartisan way on reforms that will expand coverage, lower cost, and improve care. Lets have bipartisan hearings on the individual market, on drug prices and more. Lets call in nonpartisan expert witnesses. Lets have meaningful committee and floor debates. Lets fix what needs fixing about the Affordable Care act. Annie, carter, maury, chris anne, chuck, and millions of other americans need us to do just that. To my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, please stand up to the bullying. Stand up to the lies and work with us to improve peoples lives. Not make them worse. Paul wellstone said, politics isnt about winning. It isnt about power. It isnt about money. Politics is about working to improve peoples lives. And thats what we should be doing. You owe it to your constituents and you owe it to yourselves. Thank you, madam president. And i would yield the floor. A senator madam president . The presiding officer the senator from rhode island. Mr. Whitehouse madam president , Something Else happened this afternoon in washington that i wish to relate today on the floor relay today on the floor. And that is that the American Enterprise institute hosted the launch of senator schatzs and my American Opportunity carbon fee act. I am delighted that the American Enterprise institute did that. Their conservative credentials are rocksolid, but they dont fear debate, and they were extraordinarily helpful and openminded in allowing us to make the announcement and in hosting a discussion on the bill that followed. Virtually every person on the republican side who has thought the Climate Change problem through to a solution has come to the same place a revenueneutral, borderadjustable price on carbon. That means that all the revenues are returned to the american people. Former treasury secretaries baker, schultz, and paulson, all republicans; former e. P. A. Administrators ruckelshaus, thomas, reilly, and whitman, all republicans; and leading congress and former economic advisors Arthur Laffer and Douglas Holtz ekin, all republicans, along with many others support a revenueneutral, border adjustable carbon fee. Well, thats what we do. You all know the phrase offering an olive branch. Former republican congressman bob inglis described our proposal as an olive limb, not a branch, in pairing a carbon tax with Corporate Tax reduction. And, he said, it provides what he called an opportunity for conservatives to show how Free Enterprise can solve Climate Change. When i first came to the senate in 2007, this place was humming with bipartisan action on Climate Change. For years. But in 2010, dead stop. The Republican Party disappeared from the field after the fossil fuel industry secured from five justices on the Supreme Court the infamous Citizens United decision. The fossil fuel industry immediately, as if they saw the decision coming, launched a veritable soviet mayday parade of political artillery and rockettory. No special interests had that kind of political muscle before Citizens United. The combination of this industry political weaponry plus the proliferation of dark money plus the shady science simulacrum of climate denial has been formidable. Despite this, theres room for optimism. There are republicans willing to work with us. They just need some prospect of safe passage through the political kill zone the fossil fuel industry has created. Over 1,000 American Companies have voiced their support for the paris climate agreement including corporate powerhouses like walmart, goldman sachs, pepsico, and google. If American Companies were to mobilize in Congress Just like they did for the Paris Agreement, that would be a game changer. But not withstanding all that corporate support, the bigbusiness trade associations and lobbying groups have lined up against action on Climate Change. The u. S. Chamber of commerce, socalled, probably more accurately described as the u. S. Chamber of carbon, is one of climate actions most implacable enemies despite the good Climate Policies of so many of its member companies. How is it representing its members . Its incredible. The American Petroleum institute represents shell, b. P. , total and exxon, companies that claim to support the Paris Agreement and the climate Leadership Councils carbon fee proposal. But a. P. I. Opposes anything getting done. We all know here that Corporate America commands extraordinary attention in our political system. If american corporations aligned their Political Engagement on Climate Change with their actual position on Climate Change, which should not be asking too much of them, we could get going. So in a spirit of hopefulness, senator schatz and i reintroduced at the American Enterprise institute our American Opportunity carbon fee act, a framework that i hope both republicans and democrats can embrace. The bill would establish an economywide carbon fee on Carbon Dioxide and other Greenhouse Gas emissions. The fee would be assessed where it is easiest to administer, minimizing the compliance burden. Other Greenhouse Gases would be tied to their Carbon Dioxide equivalency with a bumper for fluoro cubans. Fluorocarbons. This would earn you a credit. The market would begin to work in this space. Our bill sets the 2018 fee per ton of carbon emitted at 49. The Central Range of the social cost of carbon last estimated by the office of management and budget. That fee would increase each year at a real 2 until emissions fall 80 below 2005 levels, and then it would follow inflation. Border adjustments for Energy Intensive goods traded with countries that have weaker or no Carbon Pricing will make sure that we protect our industries at home. We took care to design the border adjustments in harmony with World Trade Organization rules. This carbon fee would produce meaningful reductions in carbon emissions. The nonpartisan resources for the future projects a 36 drop by 2025 compared to the benchmark year of 2005, exceeding the u. S. Paris agreement commitment significantly. In addition to the environmental value, of course, a carbon fee also generates revenue. In this case, nearly 2. 1 trillion in revenue over ten years. Our plan would return every dime of that to the american people. Here is how. First, the bill lowers the top Corporate Income tax rate from 35 to 29 , a longstanding goal of republicans. This would cut american Corporate Taxes by almost 600 billion over the first decade. Second, it provides workers with a 550 refundable tax credit, 1,100 for a couple against payroll taxes. The tax credits which would grow with inflation would return almost 900 billion to the pocketbooks of american households over the first ten years. Third, it would provide a matching benefit to Social Security beneficiaries, Veterans Program beneficiaries, and certain other retirees. These benefits would total nearly 500 billion over ten years. Finally, the bill would establish a block grant, delivering the remaining funds to our states. Over 100 billion to help workers in coal country, for instance, or provide Coastal Protection for sea side states facing terrible threats of sea level rise. At the discretion of the state to meet local needs and concerns. Madam president , i understand the suffering in coal country. Coal country will continue to decline as natural gas drives coal out of the energy market. There is now no mechanism to remedy that inevitability. Remember huey longs old slogan every man a king. With a carbon fee, we could make every miner a king. A solid pension, retirement at any time, full Health Benefits for life, a cash bonus based on years worked, a voucher for a new vehicle, a college plan for their kids. These things become doable with carbon fee revenues. It is not the miners fault that the coal industry has collapsed. They worked hard. They did dangerous work. It is a rigorous occupation to be a coal miner, and they are entitled to respect. Give them their dignity. Make them kings with a small fraction of the revenue from a carbon fee, we could assure every single coal miner a lifetime of comfort, security, and financial stability. Senator schatz and i extend an open hand, an olive branch. Give senator schatz and me a republican to negotiate with. That shouldnt be too much to ask. Then lets talk about the economics. Lets talk about where the revenue should go. And because i know its a part of the bakerschultz proposal, lets talk about where we can get factbased scientifically rigorous analytics of which regulations might become unnecessary or duplicative of a carbon fees emission reductions. Lets restart the bipartisan conversation we had going until 2010. Let me close with an appeal to our patriotic sense. America holds herself out as an exemplary nation, a city on a hill. The tactics of climate denial and political menace, the fossil fuel industry has deployed around here have degraded our city. There is, madam president , a remorseless functioning of the laws of physics, of chemistry, and of biology. Deny them all you want, but time will tell. And even now everyone from our secretary of defense to every single senators home state State University understands that Climate Change is real and urgent, is teaching the science of Climate Change in those universities, and is warning of the dire consequences. When the presiding officer left the environment and Public Works Committee the other day, i was talking about the Leopold Center at the iowa State University and the powerful language in which they describe the present effects on agriculture of Climate Change and the danger of disruption to the fundamental systems of the planet. Thats the home state universities telling us what the facts are. So one day there will be a recognize there will be a reckoning, and the longer our american democracies lies incapacitated at the hands of the fossil fuel industry, the worse the outcome will be. And the worse the outcome, the greater the harm to the country we love that holds its example up to the world. We are all here extremely fond of john mccain. John mccain returned to the senate yesterday and called our country the strong, inspiring, inspirational beacon of liberty and defender of dignity of all human beings. Some beacon. If we continue to get this wrong because of what one industry did to our politics, using political menace, dark money, and fake science. America deserves better than what we are doing in this chamber on this issue. I thank the presiding officer, and i yield the floor. Mr. Enzi madam president. The presiding officer the senator from wyoming. Mr. Enzi madam president , i ask unanimous consent that the senate be in a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak therein up to ten minutes each. The presiding officer without objection. Mr. Enzi i ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its Business Today it adjourn until 10 00 a. M. , thursday, july 27. Further, that following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour deemed expired, the journal of proceedings journal of proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day and morning business be closed. Further, following leader remarks, the senate resume consideration of h. R. 1628 with the time until 2 15 p. M. Equally divided between the two leaders or their designees. Finally at 2 15 the senate vote in relation to the daines amendment number 340 as modified. The presiding officer without objection. Mr. Enzi if there is no further business to come before the senate, i ask that it stand adjourned under the previous order. The presiding officer the Senate Stands adjourned until 10 00 a. M. Tomorrow
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.