Senate Proceeding 12-02-09 on Dec 2nd, 2009 :: 6:15:50 to 6:26:55
Total video length: 8 hours Stream Tools: Stream Overview | Edit Time

Note: MetaVid video transcripts may contain inaccuracies, help us build a more perfect archive

Views:105 Duration: 0:11:05 Discussion

Previous speech:

Next speech:

6:15:47 to 6:16:07( Edit History Discussion )

John Ensign: lives, it will save money, and, mr. president, it will save medicare. thank you, mr. presi yield the floor. mr. ensign: mr. president? the presiding officer: t sena mr. ensign: mr. president, i'd ask unanimous consent that myself and my colleague -- two colleagues would be able to engage in a colloquy. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. ensign: mr. president, i want to start by talking about

6:15:50 to 6:26:55( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: John Ensign

6:16:08 to 6:16:30( Edit History Discussion )

John Ensign: the bill in general, make a couple of general points. i would be happy to yield. mr. durbin: indication how long you expect your colloquy to l . ensign: 30, 40 minutes, somewhere in there. mr. durbin: thank you. mr. ensign: mr. president

6:16:31 to 6:16:54( Edit History Discussion )

John Ensign: there's a lot of talk about this bill. i want to make some general comments about it. first of all, folwing up on my colleague from illinois, he said that this was not a half a trillion dollars in medicare cuts. well, according to the ngressional budget office,

6:16:55 to 6:17:17( Edit History Discussion )

John Ensign: it's $465 -- $464 billion to $465 billion in medicare cuts. so maybe not quite a half a trillion but certainly -- certainly we're getting close to that. there are, however, a half a trillion dollars in new taxes in this bill, 84% of which will go to those -- be paid by those making less than $200,000 a year, a direct violation of a

6:17:18 to 6:17:39( Edit History Discussion )

John Ensign: campaign pledge made by president barack obama when he was then candidate obama. this bill will result for millions of americans in increased premis and health care costs. this is a massive government takeover of our health care system. as a matter of fact, according to the national cenr for

6:17:40 to 6:18:05( Edit History Discussion )

John Ensign: policy analysis, in this bill, this 2,074-page bill, almost 1,700 times -- 1,697 to be exact -- there are references to the secretary of health and human services, giving her the authority to create, determine or define things relating to

6:18:07 to 6:18:29( Edit History Discussion )

John Ensign: health care policy in this bill. basically we are placing a bureaucrat in charge of health care policy instead of the patient and the doctor making the choices now, mr. president, i believe we just can't be against this bill. i do believe we need a step-by-step approach, an incremental approach with some good ideas that we shoulbe

6:18:30 to 6:18:51( Edit History Discussion )

John Ensign: able to come together on. i think both sides agree that we should eliminate preexisting conditions. somebody who has played by the rules, had insurance, happens to get a disease, they penalized for that, they shouldn't be prices, have their insurance dropped. i think we can all agree on that. i think we should be able to agree that if you can buy auto insurance across state lines,

6:18:52 to 6:19:12( Edit History Discussion )

John Ensign: you should be able to buy health insurance. in the state where it's cheapest cheapest. find a state that has a policy that fits you and your famil, be able to buy it there. you can save money and you happen to be uninsured, especially today, it seems to make sense. let's have that as one of our incremental steps.

6:19:13 to 6:19:34( Edit History Discussion )

John Ensign: i also believe this bill covers some of it, but i believe we need to enscene activize people to -- incentivize people to engage in healthier behaviors. 75% of all health care costs are caused by people's behaviors. let me repeat that. ree-quarters of all health care costs are driven by

6:19:35 to 6:19:57( Edit History Discussion )

John Ensign: people's poor healthy -- by people's poor choices in their behavior. for instance, smoking. smoking costs on average around $1,400 a year to insure a smoker versus a nonsmoker. somebody who's obese versus somebody who's in the proper body weight. it's about the same, about $1,400 a year. somebody who doesn't control their cholesterol versus

6:19:58 to 6:20:19( Edit History Discussion )

John Ensign: somebody who does with medication, it's several hundred dollars a year. somebody who doesn't control their blood pressure versus somebody who does. so let's give incentives through lower premiums to encourage people to engage in healthier behaviors. that will save money for the entire health care system and it will end up with people having

6:20:20 to 6:20:40( Edit History Discussion )

John Ensign: better quality of lives as well. currently today, big businesses, because of their numbers, are allowed to take advantage of purchasing power. and small businesses to be able to join together in groups to be able to take advantage of that purchasing power. they're called small business health plans. and i believe that my colleagues are going to talk about an idea that they have, something i've

6:20:41 to 6:21:01( Edit History Discussion )

John Ensign: talked about for years, the idea of medical liability reform. there's several models out there. they're going to talk about a loser pays model, which other countries have engaged in and they don't have nearly the frivolous lawsuits nor the defensive medicine that we practice in this country. how many doctors order

6:21:02 to 6:21:22( Edit History Discussion )

John Ensign: unnecessary tests in the united states because of fear of frivolous lawsuits? talk to any doctor and they'll tell you, everybody orders unnecessary tests simply to protect themselves against the possibility that a jury may say, geez, why didn't you order this test, even though it wasn't indicated at the time?

6:21:23 to 6:21:45( Edit History Discussion )

John Ensign: so there's a lot of as a matter of fact, the congressional budget office said $100 sector and the public sector would be saved with a good medical liability reform bill. see, i believe that we need a patient-centered health care system, not an insurance company-centered health care system, not what this bill does, a government-centered health

6:21:46 to 6:22:10( Edit History Discussion )

John Ensign: care system, where a bureaucrat's in control of your healthare. we need a patient-centered. now, we have an amendment before us known as the mikulski amendment. this is more of government-centered health care. we had a report out based on prevention that said mammograms shouldn't be required -- or

6:22:11 to 6:22:32( Edit History Discussion )

John Ensign: shouldn't be paid for basically for women under 50 years of age, from 40 to 50 years of age, and women in the medicare population age, we don't need annual mammograms for them. well, this was based mainly on cost. and if you look at that time from a cost standpoint, that's probably correct. but just think about it. if you're a woman and you get

6:22:33 to 6:22:54( Edit History Discussion )

John Ensign: cancer and you could have had a mammogram diagnose that a lot earlier, well, i'll tell you what, you would have sure rather had that mammogram than had that mammogram denied. so the senator from maryland has proposed an amendment to try to fix the problem. the problem is that instead of one government determing whether somebody's

6:22:55 to 6:23:15( Edit History Discussion )

John Ensign: going to get coverage, she turns it over to the secretary of health and human services. another government bureaucrat will determine whether something like this would be paid for o not. according to the associated press, it doesn't even mention mammograms in her bill.

6:23:16 to 6:23:37( Edit History Discussion )

John Ensign: senator murkowski, senator coburn have come up with an alternative that actually puts the decision whether to cover something on a preventive service, whether it's for a mammogram for breast cancer or some other test to may be developed that's better than a mammogram, which most people think that an m.r.i. is going to be better than a mammogram for diagnosing breast cancer, or whether it's a test for prostate

6:23:38 to 6:23:59( Edit History Discussion )

John Ensign: cancer for men. those kinds of things should be determined by experts in the field, not by government bureaucrats. the various colleges, the american college of obstetrics and gynecology, for instance, they come out with certain recommendations, along with the american college of surgeons.

6:24:00 to 6:24:20( Edit History Discussion )

John Ensign: those are the experts with peer-reviewed science. that's who should determine what the recommendations are for whether we pay for preventive services or not. not a government bureaucrat. and, unfortunately, the mikulski amendment just gives it to a government bureaucrat. that's why we should reject the mikulski amendment, adopt the murkowski amendment, the senator

6:24:21 to 6:24:43( Edit History Discussion )

John Ensign: from alaska, because she puts it in the hands of the people, of the experts, where that decision should be made. and let me close with this. we have seen a lot of comparisons, people saying that other countries have a better health care s well, let me just give you an

6:24:44 to 6:25:05( Edit History Discussion )

John Ensign: example on cancer survival rates, comparing the average european union with cancer survival rates in the states. and this gets to whether a government bureaucrat is making the decision or somebody -- the doctor and the patient are maki treatment. and when they get their treatment. on kidneys -- okay? -- these are

6:25:06 to 6:25:26( Edit History Discussion )

John Ensign: five-year cancer survival rat european union, 56%. on kidney cancer, states, 63% survival rate after five years. on colorectal cancer, about the same kind of the united states and the european union. look at breast cancer down here, 79% after five years in the

6:25:27 to 6:25:47( Edit History Discussion )

John Ensign: european union, 90% in the united and a dramatic is on prostate cancer. 78% survival after five years in the european union, 99% survival rate in the united states after five years. these are dramatic differences. where would you rather get your health care if you had one of these cancers: the united states

6:25:48 to 6:26:08( Edit History Discussion )

John Ensign: or europe? canada, by the way, has even worse results than as a matter of fact, binda stronak from the canadian parliament, a member of the canadian parliament, several years ago led the charge against

6:26:09 to 6:26:29( Edit History Discussion )

John Ensign: a private system side-by-side with the government-n system up in canada. she didn't want the private system. tragically, a couple years later, she developed breast cancer. did she stay in canada to get treatment? where there's a government-run health care system? no. where did she come? to the united states. she actually got treated at ucla

6:26:30 to 6:26:52( Edit History Discussion )

John Ensign: because we have a superior system of quality here in the united states. we have a problem with cost. some of the choices -- some of the incremental steps that i've talked about will address costs, and i want to turn it over now to my colleagues, because one of the things they're going to talk about liability reform. let's look out for the patient

6:26:53 to 6:26:56( Edit History Discussion )

John Ensign: instead of the trial lawyers in the united states and their idea