Senate Proceeding on Nov 19th, 2009 :: 7:41:05 to 7:56:05
Total video length: 10 hours 21 minutes Stream Tools: Stream Overview | Edit Time

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

Views:29 Duration: 0:15:00 Discussion

Previous speech:

Next speech:

7:41:05 to 7:41:25( Edit History Discussion )

Robert Bennett: immediately. the pre-existing conditions are dealt with immediately. those who can't find coverage, that's done immediately. mr. bennett: i understand there are provisions of the bill that start immediately, but the key provisions of the bill that cost signif until 2014. why? because unless you

7:41:05 to 7:56:05( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: Robert Bennett

7:41:26 to 7:41:48( Edit History Discussion )

Robert Bennett: postponement, you cannot get the score down to the point where it is in the majority leader's bill. the challenge is that the real cost of health care is substantially more than this bill demonstrates as it comes out of the congressional budge office. why? because the congressional budget office is require by give you costs over a ten-year period, and if this whole thing started at the time the bill

7:41:49 to 7:42:11( Edit History Discussion )

Robert Bennett: passed and ran for the whole ten years, the costs would be so high that it could not with the programs that have been put in the bill. so the easy way to save costs and bring it down below the level delay the implementation until 2014. we saw committee,he baucus bill moved

7:42:12 to 7:42:33( Edit History Discussion )

Robert Bennett: the date of implementation from january 1, 2013, to july 1, 2013, to save money, and now the reid bill moves it from july 1, 2013, to entire year of a quote -- savings." these are not savings at

7:42:34 to 7:42:54( Edit History Discussion )

Robert Bennett: these are simply delay in the implementation and therefore delay in the expenditures. i want to move to the point that the senator from mississippi was making with respect to the impact of this on the national debt and national deficit. the last time we had a -- a budget from president bush, the

7:42:55 to 7:43:16( Edit History Discussion )

Robert Bennett: last bush budget said that the total expenditures would be be $3.1 trillion. president o for expenditures of of $3.6 trillion or half a trilli more. okay. half a trillion more. you would assume, therefore,

7:43:17 to 7:43:38( Edit History Discussion )

Robert Bennett: that t deficit would -- that would occur would be rough bush deficit, but the last deficit of the bush administration before the financial crisis hit us was was $116 billion.

7:43:39 to 7:44:00( Edit History Discussion )

Robert Bennett: that's .1 trillion of the $3.1 trillion. and the first deficit of obama is $1.4 trillion. and you say well, wait a those numbers don't add up, and the reason they don't a up is this, mr. president -- we can control how much we spend, but we cannot control how much we

7:44:01 to 7:44:23( Edit History Discussion )

Robert Bennett: take in, how much we take in is a function of the economy. and let's go back to the budget that was submitted and passed here by the -- submitted by the obama administration and passed here on the floor of the senate by the democratic majority.

7:44:24 to 7:44:45( Edit History Discussion )

Robert Bennett: it projected $2.2 trillion revenue, and it projected projected $2 trillion i entitlement spending, mandatory spending. that meant that? -- that meant that everything else in government had to be borrowed. the defense department had to be borrowed.

7:44:46 to 7:45:08( Edit History Discussion )

Robert Bennett: the state department, all of our embassies overseas, all of that money had to be borrowed. the money for transportation, for the federal aviation administration had to be borrowed. the money for national parks h the money for education had to be borrowed. it wasn't that the expenditures

7:45:09 to 7:45:29( Edit History Discussion )

Robert Bennett: went up an extra $1.5 trillion to get a it was that the revenues went down. yes, the expenditures did go up, as i the expenditures under the obama budget went up roughly $500 billion from the expenditures under the bush budget. but the big problem was the

7:45:30 to 7:45:50( Edit History Discussion )

Robert Bennett: revenues went down at the same time. the cautionary tale that comes out of this is, again, mr. president, we can control how much we spend, but we cannot control how much we get in. that is a function of the economy. money does not come from the budget. money comes from the economy. and when the economy is weak as

7:45:51 to 7:46:14( Edit History Discussion )

Robert Bennett: it is right now, you're going to have deficits no matter how big an effort you make to try to avoid them. because the money simply doesn't come in. the reason i make because back again to the numbers that we realized when we were debating here, the money coming in was $2.2 trillion and

7:46:15 to 7:46:35( Edit History Discussion )

Robert Bennett: the money already committed in entitlement benefits that the congress did not deal with in the appropriaon process was $2.2 trillion. and what we would do if passed the bill the majority leader has interdutiesed here, or will introduce here, is to crease the amount spending. increase the commitment of the federal government to make

7:46:36 to 7:46:59( Edit History Discussion )

Robert Bennett: expenditures in the health care area that will be beyond the reach of the appropriations committee, will be going out whether we have the moneyoming in to pay for them or not. i know that the score out of c.b.o. says that this will save money for the federal government, but let's get into the details of what the c.e.o. had to say to see how much it

7:47:00 to 7:47:22( Edit History Discussion )

Robert Bennett: would save and see why it would save. the c.b.o. says this about the longer-term calculations with respect to this bill. a direct quote -- "these longer-term calculations assume that the provisions are and remain the next two decades, which is

7:47:23 to 7:47:46( Edit History Discussion )

Robert Bennett: not often the case for major legislation." close quote. i think unde major legislation does not often go unchanged for two decades. congress will add goodies. congress will delay some of the ta we see that every year with respect to the legislation that

7:47:47 to 7:48:07( Edit History Discussion )

Robert Bennett: is known around here as the doc fix. it's in the law right now that every year we cut reimbursement to doctors under medicare, and every year the congress comes in and says, well, we won't do it this the doc fix comes in and ss we will change this earlier situation.

7:48:08 to 7:48:29( Edit History Discussion )

Robert Bennett: that means any score that depends on our not passing a docs fix is going to be and c.b.o. themselves says that. again, these longer-term calculations assume that the provisions are enacted and remain unchanged throughout the next two decades, which is often

7:48:30 to 7:48:52( Edit History Discussion )

Robert Bennett: not the case for major legislation. all right, now, we how the costs are going to come down. what does c.b.o. have to say ab and this is the quote that has to do with what i was talking about with respect to expanding the federal commitment for entitlement spending in health care. quoting again from c.b.o. --

7:48:53 to 7:49:13( Edit History Discussion )

Robert Bennett: "under the legislation, federal outlays for health care would increase during the 2010-2019 period, as would the federal budgetary commitment to health care." close quote. the federal budgetary commitment to health so, how do you get a score that

7:49:14 to 7:49:36( Edit History Discussion )

Robert Bennett: says we're going to save money? you get the score because you have projected revenues that will increase. you have tax provisions in there that say, well, we'll get the money from this we'll get the money from that tax. and then it will be a saving to the federal government. it's not a saving to the federal government.

7:49:37 to 7:49:58( Edit History Discussion )

Robert Bennett: it's a raising of federal revenues above the commitment to spend. but as i pointed out in the beginning, the raising of federal revenues is not an automatic thing upon which we can depend. it is dependent upon the economy. what happens if we make the commitment to the spending and

7:49:59 to 7:50:19( Edit History Discussion )

Robert Bennett: then the economy is not good and the revenues do not the level that c.b.o. is projecting? and these are all assumptions that c.b.o. is making, feeding into the computers. the computer project any kind of economic downturn, any kind of recession, any kind of problem. if just says well, if, if, and

7:50:20 to 7:50:41( Edit History Discussion )

Robert Bennett: if you'll get this number. and then they plug that number in, and that number says it will be big enough to pay for all of this. but make no mistake, what c.b.o. says on the side where we can control it -- the spending side -- it says it would increase the federal budgetary commitment to health so once again, we have an

7:50:42 to 7:51:02( Edit History Discussion )

Robert Bennett: entitlement spending. we have the demand for money going out going up on the hope that the revenues coming in will somehow be greater than the amount going up. and, therefore, we can project that this will save the government money. how accurate has c.b.o. been in the p

7:51:03 to 7:51:23( Edit History Discussion )

Robert Bennett: spending side? well, we can go back to lyndon johnson and joe califano who created medicare in the first place, and take tir original projections as to how much medicare would cost. i've given that speak here on the floor before. the answer is medicare costs 20 times more than was projected at

7:51:24 to 7:51:45( Edit History Discussion )

Robert Bennett: the time it was and you can do the same thing with medicaid. it's not quite that big. it's not quite 20 times. schip, whatever it is, with the exception of medicare part-d, which was a republican initiative, every single time the federal government has put

7:51:46 to 7:52:06( Edit History Discussion )

Robert Bennett: in a federal program for medical activity and medical expenditures, the actual expenditures have exceeded the going back to medicare, 20 times exceeding it. that's the spending we cannot produce that kind of money on the revenue side because we cannot really control

7:52:07 to 7:52:29( Edit History Discussion )

Robert Bennett: the amount of revenue that comes in. the amount of revenue tha in is a function of the economy. once again, where are we this?? year? $2.2 trillion in revenue, substantially below the amount of revenue that came in in the bush administration. it's not more or less.

7:52:30 to 7:52:52( Edit History Discussion )

Robert Bennett: it was the economy that made a downturn. and if we think in this body we can repeal the business cycle and see that there will be no more tkwupbs in the future, we future, we're kidding ourselves. there will be downturns and there will we be with the commitment in place, the increase in the federal budgetary

7:52:53 to 7:53:13( Edit History Discussion )

Robert Bennett: care without the revenue to pay for it. all right, this is c.b.o. again. "the could be quite different if key provisions of the bill were ultimately changed or not fully implemented.

7:53:14 to 7:53:34( Edit History Discussion )

Robert Bennett: if those changes arose from future legislation, c.b.o. would estimate their costs when that legislation was being considered by the close quote. in other words, we will make no attempt to guess about what's going to happen in the future. but, we can tell you that any kind of tinkering with this in

7:53:35 to 7:53:55( Edit History Discussion )

Robert Bennett: the future is going of our predictions wrong. that's the logical thing for them to say. it's the prudent thing for them to say. and it's the accurate thing for them to say. now, there are many t this bill that ion't like. i am convinced it will increase premiums for those who currently have h

7:53:56 to 7:54:17( Edit History Discussion )

Robert Bennett: there's no way it can produce the kd of results that my friend from maryland talked about of covering 30 million more people and cutting costs for everybody in middle america without costing a lot more money someplace else. and one of those

7:54:18 to 7:54:38( Edit History Discussion )

Robert Bennett: to be either in your tax responsibility or in increased premiums or the states. we all know how the governors feel about this proposal. the governor have said this proposal will bankrupt us by the rolling of medicaid costs on to the states, not republican governors. it is democratic governors that

7:54:39 to 7:54:59( Edit History Discussion )

Robert Bennett: have come forward and said we can't handle this. so, there are lots of things about this bill that i don't like. but i believe that the score that has been put together is not an honest i am not accusing c.b.o. of doing anything wrong. i am accusing those who wrote the bill of putting in

7:55:00 to 7:55:21( Edit History Discussion )

Robert Bennett: provisions so that we'll delay this impmentation there, we'll call for this tax here. and the score that it goes there, and so on. and it ends up that when you feed all of that information to the computer and then say, oh, mighty computer, none of this will change. what's the the computer gives you a number, but it's a number based on

7:55:22 to 7:55:44( Edit History Discussion )

Robert Bennett: assumptions that are based on smok there's an old saying, with there's thers smoke, there's fire. this bill has a lot of smoke in it. in my opinion, it is the american pple that are going to get i yield the floor and suggest the absence of a the presiding

7:55:45 to 7:55:50( Edit History Discussion )

Robert Bennett: clerk will call the roll.