|00:00:00||TO SAY TO OUR COLLEAGUE FROM WYOMING WHO IS A IF I SAINGSDZ HAS A LOT OF EXPERIENCE ON THESE ISSUES, WHO COMES DOWN EVERY WEEK WITH A SECOND OPINION ABOUT THE HEALTH CARE BILL AND A MOST RECENT ONE AS WE'VE ALL SEEN NOW IS CONTRARY TO PREDICTIONS, HEALTH CARE COSTS ARE GOING UP, PREDICTIONS THAT WERE THEY WOULD GO DOWN THAT.|
|00:00:20||IS ALSO SOMETHING THAT MANY OF US SAW COMING.|
|00:00:22||BUT JUST THE QUESTION ABOUT, OKAY, IF WE LEAVE THIS ON THE BOOKS AND IF THEY DECIDE AT SOME POINT TO RESURRECT IT AFTER THEY HAVE ALREADY ACKNOWLEDGED THAT IT DOESN'T WORK BUT COME UP WITH SOME NEW LANGUAGE THAT DOES AWAY WITH THE JUDD GREGG PROVISO ON THERE, WHAT ARE THE FISCAL CONSEQUENCES OF THIS PROGRAM BEING RESURRECTED?|
|00:00:43||I MEAN, YOU KNOW, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS AND THERE WERE LOTS OF PREDICTIONS MADE AT THE TIME.|
|00:00:46||IN FACT, THE SENATOR FROM ARIZONA I THINK HAD SOME OF OUR COLLEAGUES WHO MADE STATEMENTS ON THE FLOOR AT THE TIME ABOUT HOW THIS WAS GOING TO BE A GREAT DEAL AND HOW IT WAS GOING TO WORK.|
|00:00:55||THE -- THE ADMINISTRATION SAID AT THE TIME THAT THIS IS, THIS IS NOT A BUDGET GIMMICK.|
|00:01:01||THAT'S WHAT THEY WERE QUOTED AT SAYING.|
|00:01:03||CLEARLY THIS WAS A BUDGET GIMMICK.|
|00:01:05||WE ALL KNOW THAT NOW.|
|00:01:08||IT IS A PONZI SCHEME, AT LEAST CLEARLY THAT'S WHAT THE ACTUARIES ARE SAYING AT HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES.|
|00:01:15||SO IF THEY -- IF, IN FACT, WE DON'T GET THIS REPEALED AND WE END UP AT SOME POINT THIS PROGRAM BEING RESURRECTED, WHAT ARE THE FISCAL CONSEQUENCES AND IMPLICATIONS FOR THE COUNTRY AND FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS WHO ARE GOING TO BE SADDLED WITH YET ANOTHER UNFUNDED LIABILITY, ANOTHER ENTITLEMENT PROGRAM THAT ISN'T PAID FOR?|
|00:01:30||A SENATOR: TO MY COLLEAGUE, I WOULD SAY I THINK THIS IS DEVASTATING FOR THE COUNTRY, AND I TOLD THE PRESIDENT DIRECTLY THAT I THOUGHT HIS PROPOSAL OVERALL WAS GOING TO BANKRUPT THE COUNTRY.|
Mr. THUNE. I would say to our colleague from Wyoming, who is a physician and has a lot of experience on these issues, who comes down every week with a second opinion talking about all the various issues regarding the health care bill--the more recent one, as we have all seen now is contrary to predictions--health care costs are going up. The predictions were that they would go down. That is also something many of us saw coming.
The question is if we leave this on the books, and if they decide at some point to resurrect it--after they have already acknowledged it doesn't work--and come up with some new language that does away with the Judd-Gregg proviso, what are the fiscal consequences of this program being resurrected? We talked about this, and there were lots of predictions made at the time.
In fact, the Senator from Arizona had statements from some of our colleagues who said on the floor at the time how this was going to be a great deal and how it was going to work. The administration said at the time that this was not a budget gimmick. That is what they were quoted as saying. Clearly this was a budget gimmick. We all know that now. It is a Ponzi scheme. Clearly that is what the actuaries are saying at Health and Human Services.
If, in fact, we don't get this repealed and at some point this program ends up being resurrected, what are the fiscal consequences and implications for the country and future generations who will be saddled with yet another unfunded liability, another entitlement program that is not paid for?