Transcript of Pelosi, Van Hollen Press Conference Today

Press Conference

Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi and Congressman Chris Van Hollen, Ranking Member of the House Budget Committee, held a press conference today in the Capitol Visitor Center. Below is a transcript of the press conference:

Leader Pelosi. Good morning, everyone. Spring is just about here. We have celebrated St. Patrick's Day. We observed the Feast of St. Joseph two days later. And this Sunday marks the fourth anniversary of President Obama signing the Affordable Care Act. Four years later, we have seen the reforms and the initiatives of that law transform the lives of millions of Americans for the better, delivering on the dream of quality, affordable, accessible coverage for all Americans and ending some of the worst abuses of the insurance companies. No longer may you be denied coverage because you have a preexisting condition. No longer is being a woman a preexisting medical condition. No longer may an insurer place annual lifetime limits on your care. And the list goes on.

Thanks to the Affordable Care Act, millions of Americans are enjoying newfound health security and the personal and economic freedom that comes with it. More than five million people have enrolled in health coverage through the online insurance marketplace, and that number is growing. 3.1 million young people have been able to stay on their parents' health plan until age 26. Millions more have secured coverage through the Medicaid expansion.

For our seniors, the Affordable Care Act expanded free preventative care, annual checkups -- no charge -- and other exams, closed the Medicare donut hole -- making prescription drugs less expensive -- slowed the premium increases, and this is important, and my colleague will talk about this: added at least eight years to the Medicare trust fund.

The Affordable Care Act is not only about health care, it is about the good health of America. Because the coverage is portable. It gives a person the opportunity to take it with him or her to start a business, to be self-employed, to change jobs, to have freedom and opportunity.

Fifty-one times the Republicans have voted to repeal this freedom and opportunity for the American people. These ceaseless Republican votes are not only a waste time, they have a real and heavy opportunity cost: time wasted on partisan antics that should have been spent instead on our top priority and the top priority of the American people -- creating jobs. We need for Congress to get back to work. We are sort of a now and then, occasional, drive by Congress. We need to be here to create jobs.

And it's as simple as A B C:

American made: "Make It In America." Give tax breaks to companies that keep jobs here instead of tax breaks that the Republicans support that send jobs overseas.

Build America: Create jobs in the near view by investing in our infrastructure to rebuild our nation and, in the longer run, lay the foundation for jobs of the future with renewed commitments to education.

And, C, community based initiatives -- on education, on safe neighborhoods, and the rest. And, give leverage to workers with collective bargaining and the rest. Again: freedom, opportunity, leverage for the American people, for the middle class.

As we push forward for job creation, we must vote to renew emergency unemployment benefits. It is getting to the point of almost scandalous -- certainly immoral for a long time. We are also calling for a vote on comprehensive immigration reform, which will create jobs. I don't know if you saw some of the report on businesses that said that 37 percent of the corporate leaders who were asked said that they were prepared to expand to create jobs. What would make more of them do so? Well, one reason would be if we passed comprehensive immigration reform. It is a job creator. It is a deficit reducer. It is a moral responsibility that we have.

So, again, all of these 51 times spent on taking away these privileges for the American people -- no longer be denied coverage, no longer being a woman, no more lifetime limits on your care. This is a remarkable, remarkable achievement for the American people. And should there be ways that we need to improve it, let's discuss that. But let's not pull the plug on the good health of the American people.

So one of our champions in the Congress who understands the budget implications of all of this, he is a man who knows his way around numbers. And he has been a real champion for a healthier America, both in terms of our physical health and our fiscal health -- the gentleman from Maryland, the ranking member of the Budget Committee, Chris Van Hollen.

Congressman Van Hollen. Thank you, Leader Pelosi. It is great to be here with you and all of our friends in the gallery here as we celebrate the fourth anniversary of the passage of the Affordable Care Act. And I want to talk a little bit about some of the direct benefits to Americans' pocketbooks and some of the really important benefits to the economy that haven't gotten as much attention until now and I hope will get greater focus in the days ahead.

First of all, the new law requires that insurance companies spend more of each dollar they get in premiums on providing health care. In fact, 80 cents of every dollar they get in a premium now has to go to help provide health care to patients and consumers. Before that, more of every dollar was going to profits and overhead. And as a result of that provision, a direct result of that provision, $500 million was returned to consumers and taxpayers and people with coverage in 2012. And, in fact, consumers saved another $3.5 billion because insurance companies had to comply with that requirement -- more of every dollar in premiums going to care rather than profit and overhead -- a direct benefit to the American pocketbook.

Secondly, for seniors on Medicare with higher prescription drug costs, because we closed that donut hole, 7.3 million seniors saved, on average, $1,209 per year on their prescription drug costs. That is real money in the pocket of seniors.

Third, because we got rid of a lot of the overpayments in Medicare and some of the wasteful spending, Medicare Part B premiums have not gone up in real terms at all since the passage of the Affordable Care Act. We used to hear lots of stories about seniors who would get those notices that their Part B premiums were going up. They haven't gone up in real terms since the passage of the Affordable Care Act. In fact, in this year, they have actually gone down somewhat in real terms. So that is a consequence of some of the cost savings in the Affordable Care Act.

Fourth, we have seen a historic slowdown in the rate of increase in healthcare costs in this country, the lowest increase in health care costs in 50 years -- the lowest on record. And the Affordable Care Act was an important contributor to that effort. And as a result of that, taxpayers will save $1.6 trillion over the next 10 years, if you include the interest savings by not having to make those payments. That is a huge amount of savings and a huge benefit to the economy. It reduces the deficit and, therefore, reduces the out-year drag on economic growth and helps the economy in very tangible ways. And that's just the savings to the taxpayers through the slowdown in healthcare costs in federal programs like Medicare and Medicaid. Those kind of savings are also going to be achieved in the private sector, because they will have to pay lower costs than they would otherwise have to pay.

And the Council of Economic Advisors has estimated that even if half -- half -- of the slowdown in health care costs continues, that 10 years from now, the average premium for Americans will save $1,400. That's less money that businesses who provide health care premiums have to pay. That frees up more money for wages, more money for them to invest in the economy. And, of course, for individuals who are going into the exchanges, it means lower premiums and, therefore, more money in the family pocketbook. These are real, tangible savings that we would achieve that help the pocketbook and help the economy. And I should say that if our Republican colleagues have their way, they would wipe out all the benefits Leader Pelosi talked about, and they would wipe out some of those other important benefits that I talked about.

And the last point I want to make, because we don't know yet whether we are going to see a Republican budget in the House, but just a flash warning, because last year they claimed to have a budget that balanced in 10 years. That claim of budget balance was a fraud if they also claim that they want to repeal the Affordable Care Act. And here is why: their budget only reached balance in the 10 years because they got rid of all the good things in the Affordable Care Act, like the tax credits that help more Americans be able to afford health care, but they kept all the revenues. They kept the same amount of revenues generated from the Affordable Care Act in their budget. They kept some of the Medicare savings, which they rail against and demagogue against, and if they hadn't kept them, they wouldn't be in balance.

So it is absolutely untrue that you can both repeal the Affordable Care Act and claim that their budget is in balance. That claim, putting those two things together, is a fraud. We will have to see if they try that again this year.

The President's budget, by contrast, focuses on economic security through the Affordable Care Act but builds upon that by investing more in jobs and our economy, saying we need to invest more in science and research and innovation, we need to invest in early education and workforce training, and we need to close those tax breaks that currently provide perverse incentives for American companies to shift jobs overseas, close those tax breaks and use those revenues to invest right here at home in modernizing our infrastructure so we can compete in the 21st century.

That's what the President's budget does. It focuses on jobs and opportunity. And if we could just get beyond the 51 times that we voted to repeal the Affordable Care Act and 16 days of government shutdown and focus on these issues, we could be doing even better in this country, as Leader Pelosi said. Thanks.

Leader Pelosi. Thank you very much, Ranking Member Van Hollen, for your leadership and your clear presentation. We always talk about how this Affordable Care Act honors the values of our Founders -- of life, a healthy life, liberty, the freedom to pursue your happiness, whatever that may be. And you see some of the benefits that the Republicans want to overturn.

But I think, by listening to Mr. Van Hollen, it is clear that if there were no other reason to pass the Affordable Care Act, the status quo was unacceptable. Because the cost and the rising cost of health care were unsustainable to individuals, unsustainable to businesses small and large, and certainly unsustainable to state, local, and federal budgets.

And so, slowing down the growth of healthcare cost -- also reducing the cost, period, not just slowing the cost -- and having many more people served in a quality way, again, improves health. The earlier the intervention, the less costly it is and the healthier the person. But the cost factor was a prime motivator for us to go forward with the Affordable Care Act, and any repeal of it increases the deficit.

I want to just turn for a moment -- and then we will take your questions -- to the Ukraine. The rapidly unfolding developments in the Ukraine this week have drawn the deep concern of the international community, as we all know. International leaders have joined President Obama in saying that the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine must be respected. The referendum passed in Crimea earlier this week and the subsequent actions by the Crimean parliament and Russian Government are illegitimate. The Ukrainian people have the right to determine their own future and their own destiny, free from interference of any foreign nation.

When Congress returns next week, the Senate is scheduled to consider aid to Ukraine. It is my hope that the Senate will pass what we've already passed in the House -- the bill for the billion dollar loan guarantee to the Ukraine -- but that it will also include the IMF provisions. When the Prime Minister of Ukraine was here a week or so ago, he made a specific request for diplomatic and economic cooperation. He made it very clear that the role the IMF will play in the economic stability of Ukraine was essential, with the hope that Congress would recognize that and pass that. The House should act swiftly, too, to not only have the loan guarantee but also pass the reforms of the IMF, which the economic impact would be great and is greatly needed by the people of the Ukraine.

With that, I'd be pleased to take any questions you may have. Yes, ma'am?

Q: Madam Leader, yesterday, Speaker Boehner signaled that the House would not be taking up the Senate's unemployment extension, arguing that Washington Democrats need to come up with a better pay-for, need to come up with a plan to extend UI that would create jobs. What's your response?

Leader Pelosi. Well, here we go again. Once again, the House Republicans have painted themselves into the far extreme. Democrats and Republicans in the Senate have come to a compromise on the length of time and the pay-for. I, myself, do not believe that the unemployment insurance benefits need to be offset. Most of the time, they have not. But if they're going to be offset and there's bipartisan agreement to do so, then let's just take that up and get this done. Months have gone by. Over two million people have not received their unemployment benefits -- those on long term unemployment.

And the fact is that this is a stimulus to the economy. Ask any economist. Unemployment benefits are spent immediately, injecting demand into the economy and creating jobs. Now, we want to create jobs in the way that the President has in his budget and the way that Mr. Van Hollen described, but this is something that is a stimulus. So for the benefit of those people, their families -- these families are in danger now of losing their homes. And why? Because of the extreme nature, the indifference of the Republicans in the House to the needs of the American people. Even after the Senate, in a bipartisan way, has agreed to a compromise with pay-fors -- which, as I say, I don't think need to be offset, but as a compromise would be willing to accept.

Yes, sir?

Q: Looking forward -- and this is more of a politics question than a policy question…

Leader Pelosi. Why don't we stick with policy for a moment and get back to politics because…

Q: It's not terribly political. Republicans are hoping to take the Senate. Obviously, you hope to retake the House, and you hope the Senate stays Democrat. But if that doesn't happen, there will be the question of how much President Obama will be willing to deal with the Republican Congress. But I'm just curious…

Leader Pelosi. You're being highly speculative now as to who is going to win what and what the President will do.

Q: But you had the obverse of this in 2007 and 2008. And I was just wondering what is your take on the President's willingness to deal on issues like the ACA or entitlements or taxes should that happen?

Leader Pelosi. I am going to yield to you on this. But let me just say, when we had the obverse of this in 2007 and 2008 when President Bush was president, we worked with President Bush on many issues and passed very significant bipartisan legislation that was signed by him. We opposed him on the war in Iraq; most Democrats did. And we definitely all opposed him on privatizing Social Security. But apart from that, we passed the biggest energy bill in the history of our country. Some of the authorities from that bill are enabling President Obama to make some administrative decisions that are very helpful to the American people -- A.

B -- we, the Democrats, worked with President Bush to pass the TARP legislation, probably the worst vote Members ever had to take, most unpopular, but very necessary. We passed legislation, working with him, that talked about the low income tax credit that made it refundable all the way down to the poorest working people in our country. We worked with him on HIV/AIDS. He wanted PEPFAR, we wanted big PEPFAR, and we got that. And I think that's an important part of President Bush's legacy. We tried to work with him on immigration, but his own party walked away from him on that.

So what you are seeing now with the Republicans not being willing to work with the President is highly unusual. I've never seen anything quite like that. On the other hand, President Obama has all along extended the hand of friendship to the Republicans, as recently as the State of the Union on the subject of the immigration bill, willing to work with the Speaker all these many months later, but respectful of the Speaker's role in bringing a bill to the floor. So this is about as nonpartisan a President as I've ever served under. And I think that his record of wanting to be cooperative -- but you know what the Republicans say back: ""Nothing' is our agenda that we want to work with you on, and "never' is our timetable." That is really basically what we have seen from them.

So it's a two way street. But this President -- some would say maybe should be a little more partisan, but that's not who he is, and that's why the public respects him so. And that's what I think you'll see from him. But I'm not even stipulating to the fact that he is going to be working with a Republican Congress. So you have a hypothetical on top of a hypothetical on top of a hypothetical. And it sort of was a political question, don't you think?

[Laughter]

Yes, ma'am?

Q: Yes. Just on the minimum wage, wanted to get your reaction. There was a poll released yesterday by the nation's largest private staffing firm that said 38 percent of employers said they would have to lay off workers if the wage were increased to $10.10. Of course, you had the CBO study from a few weeks ago that had some findings that were sort of in line with that. Do studies like this hurt your efforts? I know you have the discharge petition, but what's your reaction?

Leader Pelosi. No. In fact, I'm not accepting of what you have said. I don't even know what those groups are. But I do know that, overwhelmingly, the American people support raising the minimum wage. It really answers some of the challenge of our colleagues who don't want to spend money on food stamps and housing support and other things that are public cooperation with families. So raising the minimum wage to $10.10 -- in our community, in California, we have a higher minimum wage. Because $10.10 is still not a living wage. But as the President said in his State of the Union address, a person who works hard full time, works hard, shouldn't have to raise his children or her children in poverty.

I want to yield to Mr. Van Hollen on either…

Congressman Van Hollen. All right. Well, let me just say on the minimum wage, let me start where Leader Pelosi left off, which is that the American people overwhelmingly believe that if you work full time all year round, you should not be below the federal poverty line. You should have enough to be able to support your family at a very basic level. And the minimum wage will provide almost 20 million Americans with an immediate increase in their wages so they can better support their families, and millions more Americans will also see wage increases. And that's why the American public overwhelmingly supports the increase in the minimum wage.

Now, you've got conflicting studies -- you've got the Council of Economic Advisors that doesn't share the opinion of the Congressional Budget Office. I would say that if you actually look carefully at the Congressional Budget Office numbers, what they're talking about is a somewhat, a relatively small reduction in employment in the year 2017. And this brings me right back to the unemployment issue, because that is something we could do right now that, according to the Congressional Budget Office, would add up to 300,000 jobs by the end of this year -- by the end of this year. And that's just extending unemployment insurance. Their best guess is 200,000, up to 300,000.

But if you take the take the other measures we're talking about, like the investments the President has called for and investing in our infrastructure, you will also put millions of Americans back to work. And so that's the way to grow the economy. The way to grow the economy is not to pay people sub-poverty wages. The way to grow the economy is to make sure they have livable wages but also to invest in opportunity and jobs, and, as the Leader said, immigration reform. Immigration reform would provide a big boost to the economy. The Congressional Budget Office says that will add three and a half percent to economic growth 10 years from now, and that will be a steady increase. Those are big things we could do.

But for goodness' sakes, people who work full time should be able to support their family and not have to live in poverty.

Leader Pelosi. And the American people support that. And, by the way, again, this is money that will be spent immediately because this is people on the margins. They're going to spend this money immediately, injecting demand into the economy. It's a very high priority and a very important part of our "When Women Succeed, America Succeeds." Over 60 percent of the people making the minimum wage are women. And that's why we have as our first point of Making Work Pay -- raise the minimum wage.

We also have pay equity. In the first week of April, women will start making -- those who, in some parts of the country, make 77 percent of what a man makes, who are capable colleagues working next to each other, the man makes 100 percent, the woman makes 77 percent -- which means that she's worked the first three months of the year for free, and whatever that means to her children and it means to her retirement and to her family in between. So it's a really important part.

In addition to that, we have paid sick leave. In addition to that, we have child care, early childhood learning. "Children learning, parents earning.' And I spent the last five days in Texas, in different cities, visiting childcare centers, listening to women and the rest.

And raising the minimum wage is something -- we have the legislation, the public supports it overwhelmingly. I believe they will be taking it up sometime soon in the Senate, and I hope that we can do so in the House. And that's why we have a discharge petition to that effect.

Yes, ma'am?

Q: Leader Pelosi, you have been championing the benefits of the healthcare law for the last 4 years, but I don't see a lot of other Democrats celebrating the anniversary today. And, in fact, some of the messaging that Democrats are running on this term is fixing the problems with the healthcare law since the rocky rollout. Isn't the law proving to be more of a political liability for your party?

Leader Pelosi. Well, this isn't about politics, this is about the health of America. This is about standing tall, as the country did, on Social Security, Medicare, Affordable Care Act. So we don't weigh its value as to what it means politically. We weigh its value as to what it means to the health, well-being, economic and health security of America's families. I take issue -- I see these little things in the paper about this or that, but our Members, the story that you don't write or see, maybe, because you're in Washington and our Members are out in their districts, is that, as I travel, I see Members standing tall.

As I've said to you before, we're not running on this, we're running on what the American people want us to run on, and that is job creation. Show us the jobs. Where are the jobs? Why are we not here passing a jobs agenda, instead of 51 times having political nonsense on the floor of the House?

But I'm very proud of our Members. Yeah, any bill that's passed is not perfect. I wanted single payer. I wanted a public option. So, you know, I have some changes I would make myself. But as the implementation takes place, as we see improvements that can be made to any compromise, which the bill was, we'll do that. But just because people say, "I don't want to repeal it, but I do want to fix it," doesn't mean they're walking away from it. Again, I'm very proud of our Members and the initiatives that are being taken in their districts to enroll people and the stories that they are hearing.

One story I heard recently was about even a Baptist church down south that said, I got $20,000 back because of the medical loss ratio provisions -- they didn't know that term -- but because of the Affordable Care Act.

So this is hard. Change is hard. This is transformational in the lives of the American people, transformational in what it means to the dynamism of our economy when people can be free to follow their pursuits.

So, again, from a technological standpoint, forgetting the rollout, but from the standpoint of medical electronic records and what that does to improve the health of all Americans, that the most privileged person in America with all the money and access to quality care that he or she may have had before is better now because we know more about disease because of the bill. We just couldn't be prouder.

And the simple fact is the Court did Citizens United just in time for the Republicans to put out all of their misrepresentations about the Affordable Care Act, and that's hard to counter.

Who had a question? Because I have to go to the airport. Yes, sir?

Q: We are hearing voices in the insurance industry saying that the ACA is going to lead directly to premium increases. And you're saying…

Leader Pelosi. Really? Who? Name names. Name names. Name names.

Q: I don't have names, but…

Leader Pelosi. Okay, because I have some.

Q: …They're talking to us on background and off the record, and they're saying that this law is going to do it, that it's a sensitive subject and they don't want to stir you guys up too much, but…

Leader Pelosi. Well, you know, how can I answer that? Somebody who will be nameless has said something in private that you want me to respond to?

Q: Well, the industry is always going to blame the law for something. I understand that point. But you're saying that premiums are going to decrease. They're saying they're going to increase, and they're blaming the law. So how do you reconcile those two conflicting things?

Congressman Van Hollen. Let me just respond to that and then, also, as part of the earlier question, which is I think the important: opinion poll shows that a majority of Americans, number one, are in favor of keeping the Affordable Care Act. They don't want to repeal it. A majority do not want to repeal it. And so you have to ask yourselves why we spent 51 votes and shut down the Federal Government as an effort to repeal it. And so people don't like that. They are more than willing to try and work constructively to address issues as they arise.

Now, if you look at the period between 2000 and 2006 and beyond, premiums in the United States went through the roof, right? They more than doubled. Insurance company profits from the top 10 insurance companies quadrupled. And so what the Affordable Care Act is doing is slowing down the rate of increase in premiums. People are going to be paying lower premiums than they would have as a result of the Affordable Care Act.

Now, there is no doubt that within the exchanges it's important to get the right mix of people, including younger people who sometimes think they're indestructible until of course they get into a terrible car accident, and then their family is potentially bankrupted as a result of that. So that's why the Affordable Care Act has important provisions to bring those individuals into the pool. It also has important provisions in it to prevent, you know, huge jumps in the area of premium increases.

So, look: the numbers are pretty clear, and the Congressional Budget Office has been clear that the rate of increase in healthcare costs today is at a 50-year low -- lowest on historical record. And those lower healthcare cost increases translate into lower premiums than people otherwise would have. And, again, those aren't our numbers. Those are the numbers that are in the economy today being picked up by, you know, people whose business it is to look at those issues.

Leader Pelosi. You have a double whammy here if you're saying that Members are not embracing the Affordable Care Act and people in private are saying this or that. So forgive my enthusiasm for saying, "Yeah?" The plural of "anecdote" is not "data." There may be somebody who said this and there may be somebody who said that, but the facts are these:

Since the enactment of the Affordable Care Act, the growth in healthcare costs has slowed dramatically, as Congressman Van Hollen mentioned. It was soaring before. That includes the costs paid by government, by businesses, and individuals. For example, Medicare Part B premiums have been stable since the ACA's enactment, something that had been on a different incline. Average Medicare Advantage premiums are down nearly 10 percent since the ACA's enactment. Annual premiums for employer sponsored health coverage for an employee increased only three percent in 2012, the smallest increase since 1996.

Name names. CEO of Aetna, Mark Bertolini, said in January, "Given the general demographics that the CMS released yesterday, I am not alarmed. They're better than I thought they would have been." As the chief financial officer of WellPoint said, "Things are not necessarily way out of whack with our expectations."

So, again, you can find anybody to say anything, but the fact is the pattern is one of much lower cost than they would have been to the economy. And the more people who enroll, the better it will be, because people will be healthier. So, again, we can talk about who says what, but the facts will speak for themselves, and we are very confident about the path that the Affordable Care Act is on. And we don't want to contribute to an atmosphere of fear, where people think, "Oh, I'm not going to sign up because it's going to go up." We have to, again, be clear as to what the facts are.

I think we have time for one more.

Q: Madam Leader, could I just ask, in the current environment in a swing district, is Obamacare a winner or a loser politically?

Leader Pelosi. You have to ask the Member. But I believe that it's a winner. And by the way, it's called the Affordable Care Act. It's called the Affordable Care Act. I know you didn't intend any compliment or derogatory -- it's called the Affordable Care Act. And the Affordable Care Act -- people know what it is, and see what it means to them. And that's a case we have to make. We're grown-ups. When Franklin Roosevelt moved forward with Social Security, he said: "I'm so convinced about this. Now make me do it." Everybody has to spread the word as to what this is. As the president said yesterday, change is hard. It always is.

Q: First of all, I was only reflecting that the president himself has used that term.

Leader Pelosi. And I tell him the same thing I tell you.

[Laughter]

Q: I'm flattered.

Leader Pelosi. Affordable -- affordable. There's a reason. Affordable. Affordable. Affordable. Affordable. The reason they changed the name of it is because they wanted to get away, the opponents, from the word "affordable." And that's why I'm impatient with some of these comments. Whatever it is, it's infinitely more affordable than the path that we were on without the Affordable Care Act.

Q: Then why are so many Democrats struggling to respond to the attacks?

Leader Pelosi. Well, I don't know that they are. I don't know. Are you in their districts? -- I don't know how many...

Q: I was in Florida.

Leader Pelosi. Hmm?

Q: I was in Florida, yes ma'am.

Leader Pelosi. Well -- and Alex Sink said that she supported the Affordable Care Act and wanted to make improvements on it. I said that myself. I don't see anything different about it. I don't think anything different about that. But on that score, with all the money spent, with all the criticism of the Affordable Care Act and a 13 point advantage Republican district, we got it down to below two points. I think we're ready for the next putt, as I said last week, but we'll talk politics another day, because I have to go.

But let me just say this before I leave. Our thoughts and prayers are with the families of the people on the airplane. It is so sad, so tragic. Can you ever imagine? And when you see the pictures of the little baby and the young couple and the family members who were on there, it just is so sad. And every one of them a precious gift of God, and now the uncertainty. So we keep hoping that some miracle has had them land someplace. But whatever it is, that the families will have closure and they will have it soon.

Mr. Van Hollen, did you want to stay some remarks about what you've heard?

Congressman Van Hollen. Well, thanks. On the Affordable Care Act, I would like to say that you have a huge amount of money being dumped into these congressional races by these outside, independent groups that are totally distorting the facts and misleading voters. The Leader mentioned the amount of money the Koch brothers have been pumping into these races. Again, massive campaigns of distortion and misleading voters.

In Florida-13, actually, if you look at the universe of persuadable voters -- the people who are independent voters -- Alex Sink did very well with those voters, the people that they were trying to convince should not vote for her because of things like the Affordable Care Act. They didn't succeed. There was a turnout issue. As the Leader said, you already had a tilt toward Republican turnout, and that was magnified. But in terms of what we call the swing voters, they did not succeed on the issue of the Affordable Care Act.

But I do think it's important that people understand what massive distortion campaigns they're playing. For example, this whole issue on the Medicare savings. We achieved Medicare savings by getting rid of overpayments and waste in Medicare -- savings that the Republicans kept in their own budget and which every one of them in this House voted for. And it's just entirely hypocritical and grossly misleading for them to go out and mislead voters and pretend that somehow that is hurting voters, when they all voted for it in this budget.

And they know darn well it has, number one, prolonged the life of Medicare actuarially, because that means Medicare doesn't have to waste dollars on unnecessary activities. That means more money for Medicare. And that's one of the reasons Medicare Part B premiums haven't gone up, because the total dollars spent on Medicare have been reduced by eliminating a lot of that waste and unnecessary payments.

So, look, it's just like premiums, right? You have to compare what premiums are under the Affordable Care Act to what they otherwise would be. Inflation is real, right? I mean, when people say, "Well, the price is a little bit different, going to go up a little bit tomorrow," well, of course, prices rise. And healthcare prices, as we said, have historically risen much faster than inflation. And that's why premiums used to go through the roof. So compare premiums to what they would have been in the absence of the Affordable Care Act. That's the real question here. And, you know, people are spending millions of dollars in secret money playing games, and we have to get to the bottom of that issue, as well.

Leader Pelosi. Well, that cannot be ignored, the fact that -- the overwhelming amount of money. And we saw it in 2010, with their distortions then, and unlimited, undisclosed special interest money. But the fact is, is it's not to say the public needs to know more about this in your district. But it's a wonderful opportunity when people find out, and they find out not just from the Member of Congress but they find out by stories of their friends, their neighbors, their relatives, what this meant to them.

You can't say, as a Republican, say, "Oh, we'll have no preexisting conditions." Oh, really? Without the individual mandate -- when Massachusetts first tried to do the preexisting conditions without the mandate, the premiums went through the roof.

This is a comprehensive, complete, with integrity and oneness proposal. And so you can't say, "I'll keep this and I'll keep that, but I won't keep the other things." If you're going to reduce cost, both to the individual, to the family, to businesses, as I said, large and small, to the federal government, you have to have the full program. And that takes some explanation, which Members are proud to do.

But as I said before, you have stories, we have stories, but the fact is it's the personal, individual stories of people themselves which we hear across the country. We have a story bank that is so full. And I have no doubt that this will be such a joy in people's lives.

Five million -- I mean, a large number already. It's probably over 10 million when you include the kids 18 to 26 and the Medicaid, over 10 million -- well, maybe closer to 12 million -- people already who have better health insurance, better coverage, more affordable, better quality, more accessible to them.

And, with that, I'll bid you adieu and happy spring.

Source