Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I rise this afternoon, at the end of a week where--and the Presiding Officer knows this in his work representing the State of Oregon and in his work as a member of our Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee--we have spent a lot of time on health care, as we did the week before and several weeks leading up to this time. But now we are at the point where in our committee we are actually voting--voting on amendments.
We know this is a challenge that has faced America for decades: the challenge of covering people in our country who do not have coverage and making sure those who do have coverage have quality health care coverage that is affordable. So all these challenges are presented to us now.
We have a situation in the country today--and Chairman Dodd mentioned this this morning in a hearing--that about 14,000 people a day lose their health care coverage. It is hard to comprehend that every single day that number of Americans are losing their health care coverage.
Candidly, if the number was half that, it would be unacceptable--or even less than that--but that is, in a very real way, the status quo, where we are now. Thousands and thousands of people losing coverage every day, 14,000 by one count; people who might have coverage but it is hard for them to afford it or to continue to afford it, and sometimes people have coverage and it is not of the kind of quality that would ensure the best health care for them and for their families.
We are at a point now where we are beginning to see a basic choice that the Congress has to make and the American people have to make. It is the status quo or change. It is the status quo--where we are now--which, in my judgment, is unacceptable--or reform. It is coming down to a basic, fundamental choice.
The status quo right now is the enemy of change. The status quo is the impediment in front of us, the tree across the road or whatever image you want to illustrate. So we have to get to work making sure that the status quo doesn't stay in place.
There are so many ways to tell this story. Every Member of the Senate and every Member of the House and, frankly, virtually every American could tell a story about someone they know or someone they have read about and the challenges they face. In Pennsylvania, we have a lot of examples about people who are living the reality of a lack of coverage or bad quality coverage or coverage they cannot afford. One letter I got stood out for me, among many. It was written back in February of this year by Trisha Urban from Berks County, PA, the eastern side of Pennsylvania. I will read portions of her letter which I think tell the story about as well as anyone could; unfortunately, in this case, in a tragic circumstance. She wrote, talking about her husband Andrew, that he had to leave his job for 1 year to complete an internship requirement that he had to get his doctorate in psychology. The internship was unpaid and they could not afford COBRA coverage--extended health care coverage. Now I am quoting from the middle of the letter. Trisha Urban says:
Because of the preexisting conditions, neither my husband's health issues----
He had some heart trouble---- neither my husband's health issues nor my pregnancy would be covered under private insurance.
Now I am quoting again:
I worked 4 part-time jobs and was not eligible for any health care benefits. We ended up with a second rate health insurance plan through my husband's university. When medical bills started to add up, the insurance company decided to drop our coverage, stating that the internship did not qualify us for the benefits. We were left with close to $100,000 worth of medical bills. Concerned with the upcoming financial responsibility of the birth of our daughter and the burden of current medical expenses, my husband missed his last doctor's appointment less than one month ago.
Trisha Urban's letter goes on. She talks about what happened at one particular moment after summarizing their health care situation. She says, describing her pregnancy:
My water had broke the night before. We were anxiously awaiting the birth of our first child. A half-hour later, two ambulances were in my driveway. As the paramedics were assessing the health of my baby and me, the paramedic from the other ambulance told me that my husband could not be revived.
She concludes her letter this way. Again, I am quoting Trisha Urban from Berks County, PA:
I am a working class American and do not have the money or the insight to legally fight the health insurance company. We had no life insurance. I will probably lose my home and my car. Everything we worked so hard to accumulate in our life will be gone in an instant. If my story is heard, if legislation can be changed to help other uninsured Americans in a similar situation, I am willing to pay the price of losing everything.
Trisha Urban is telling us through that poignant but tragic story about her own circumstances and the circumstances surrounding the birth of her daughter and the death of her husband, all we need to know about this debate.
Then, posing that question--or that challenge, I should say--to all of us, especially those of us who have a vote in the Senate:
I am willing to pay the price of losing everything if my story can be told and legislation can be enacted to deal with health care.
That is the basic challenge that Trisha Urban has put before the Senate and the Congress and the administration. It is the challenge we must respond to. We cannot pretend it is not there. We cannot pretend that the status quo I talked about a moment ago--14,000 people losing their health insurance every day; so many other people worried about the coverage they have--we cannot pretend that is not there. We cannot say to Trisha Urban that we are sorry about the circumstances of your story, but Congress can't get it done this year.
We have to get it done. We have to pass a bill in our committee. We have to get a bill through the Finance Committee, and we have to make sure the Senate votes on this legislation this year--frankly, this summer; not late in the fall, not in the winter, not in 2010. Right now is the time for action.
President Obama has led us in this effort. He has attached the same sense of urgency to this issue that I know the American people feel.
What is it about? Well, it is about an act that a lot of Americans are just hearing about, which goes by a very simple name: the Affordable Health Choices Act. That is the act that is presently before our committee. It does a couple of things. It focuses on some fundamentals to get at that change that should come to the status quo. First, it reduces costs by way of prevention. It is very important. We know that can reduce costs substantially. It also reduces costs by better quality and information technology. It is still hard to believe that when other industries such as banking and insurance and other parts of our economy have moved into the new era of technology that our health care system isn't anywhere near where it has to be to reduce medical errors and to provide better quality. So by focusing on information technology, we can reduce costs. That is in the bill.
Also, the bill contemplates rooting out waste, fraud, and abuse--another area of cost reduction. We know that the big questions on costs will be dealt with in the other committee--the Finance Committee--but there are elements in this bill that, in fact, reduce costs.
Secondly, the bill preserves choice, that if you like what you have in your insurance plan and the coverage you have, you can keep it. There is no reason why that should change, and it won't change under this bill. But if you don't like the coverage you have, we want to give you options and we also want to give you an option in coverage if you obviously don't have any health insurance at all. So it does reduce costs, it does preserve choice, and, thirdly, it will ensure quality and affordable care for the American people.
I believe, and I think most people in the Senate believe, that one ought to have the option of not just any health care but quality care that is affordable, that you can actually make work in your own budget. So we are going to build on the system we have. We are not going to throw the old system out; we are going to build on the system we have and make it better.
We are also going to make sure that in this legislation, we protect the patient-doctor relationship. There is no reason why anyone should get in between those two, and this bill will not do that.
Finally--this is a quick summary, I know--we are going to make sure that at long last, a preexisting condition does not prevent you from getting the kind of quality health care you have a right to expect in America today.
As we move forward on this legislation, I want to make sure we highlight the fundamental obligation we have, not just in the bill--but especially in the bill--but even beyond this legislation, and that is the obligation we have to get this right for the American people, and to get it right especially for our children. The Presiding Officer knows of the great progress we made this year on children's health insurance. Thank goodness we got that done. Instead of having 6 million kids in America covered by the children's health insurance program, by way of the legislation we passed this year we are going to extend that to almost 11 million kids. That was wonderful. That is a big success and we should all be proud, but it is not enough. We should make sure that the other 5 million children out there who don't have coverage today will get it but especially a child who happens to be in a poor family, a low-income family, or a child with special needs.
Here is what the rule ought to be. This is what should happen throughout this process while enacting health care reform, but certainly at the end of the road, so to speak, ideally this fall when we will have a bill the President can sign: The rule ought to be no child worse off, and especially no child who is poor or who has special needs or is disabled. The great line from the Scriptures that talks about a faithful friend--we have heard this over many years in the context of friendship, in the context of sometimes a reading at weddings, but I would like for us today to think about it in the context of our children. This is what the Scripture said: ``A faithful friend is a sturdy shelter''--a great image about what friendship means. There are a lot of us day in and day out, year in and year out, who talk about how important children are to us, that we are advocates for children--and we should be--that we have solidarity with our children, we are going to do everything we can to protect them. In essence, we are saying we are their friend, that those of us who are elected to public office have an obligation to be a friend of and an advocate for our children. Going back to that line from the Scriptures, if we are going to be a faithful friend to children, we better make sure that we provide a sturdy shelter; not just in the context of the obvious in health care. What is more fundamental than that, other than making sure that a child has enough to eat and making sure that child has an opportunity to learn? Other than those two, health care is essential in the life of a child, especially a vulnerable child, whether they are poor or have special needs or both. So if we are faithful friends in the Senate to our children, we better provide that sturdy shelter. We better make sure that at the end of the day, these children are not worse off because of our legislation.
I wish to conclude with a thought from an expert--not someone who is just interested in children but someone who has an area of expertise which is probably unmatched. I am speaking of someone who testified last week--a week ago today, it was--in front of our committee. Her name is Dr. Judith Palfrey. She is a pediatrician, a child advocate, and happens to be president-elect of the American Academy of Pediatrics. She provided compelling testimony. I won't go through all of her testimony, but here is something she said which I think has relevance and resonance for the debate we are having on health care. She says--and I quote Dr. Palfrey's testimony:
Sometimes we as childhood advocates find it hard to understand why children's needs are such an afterthought; and why, because children are little. Because children are little, policymakers and insurers think that it should take less effort and resources to provide them health care.
Because children are little, we think that somehow less effort is required or less resources, less in the way of hard work. Well, none of us believes that, do we? We don't believe that. The health care we provide to our children, the protection, the shelter we provide them should be every bit as significant, every bit as fully resourced as the protection we give to adults. We might disagree about a lot of the details in the health care bill, but I think we all in this Chamber believe that children may be little but in God's eyes they are 7 feet tall and we must treat them accordingly, especially on legislation so significant as legislation on health care reform.
So the rule ought to be no child worse off. It is that simple. I believe we can get it right. I believe we can enact health care reform that preserves choice, reduces costs, and enhances quality and affordable coverage for the American people, and that we can make sure every child is no worse off.
This is a great challenge. We understand the difficulty of it. This is a great challenge, but it is a challenge worthy of a great nation. It is a challenge that will help us in our continuing struggle, our journey to make this a more perfect Union.
Mr. President, I yield the floor.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT