Health Care Reform

Many Iowans agree improvements are needed in the health care system.  At the same time, many are worried about Washington making things worse, not better.  The health care system makes up one-sixth of the economy.  It impacts the quality of life of every household.

This summer, committees in the House of Representatives and Senate passed legislation to overhaul the current system. Those bills would create a government plan that, according to experts, would ultimately lead to a government takeover of the health care system, which I strongly oppose.  In addition, the Congressional Budget Office said the bills would not reduce the growth in health care costs and would add hundreds of billions more to the federal deficit.  Already this year, the budget deficit has grown to $1.6 trillion, nearly quadruple last year’s figure.  Deficits are projected to climb to more than $9 trillion over the next decade, even without legislation like the House committee-passed health care bill.

The Senate Finance Committee, a different senate committee on which I serve as the Ranking Member, is considering an entirely separate health care reform bill.  I’ve offered a number of amendments and worked to try to prevent government bureaucrats from getting between you and your doctor.  To be successful, health care reform needs to slow the rate of growth in health care costs and make health insurance more affordable and accessible.  I’m also working to make sure rural states like Iowa get a fair shake as the debate rolls on.
 
During Finance Committee consideration of amendments, I won unanimous approval for an amendment that will improve access to medical care for seniors in Iowa and other rural parts of the country.  It’s getting harder and harder for seniors to find doctors serving in rural areas.  A large part of the problem is Medicare’s reimbursement policies that shortchange rural states. They act as a disincentive for doctors to serve these areas.  My amendment would remedy a problem that occurs today when  physicians in different parts of the country are paid different amounts for the same service or procedure.  This amendment addresses one aspect of the geographic disparities in physician payment, the adjustment for physicians’ costs in running their practices, by requiring Medicare to use more accurate and reliable data.  An accurate formula will provide more equitable physician payment because the differences in payments will be based on real differences in the physicians’ practice expense costs.  Part of providing greater access to health care is making sure doctors in rural areas are able keep their doors open to seniors in need of care.  It’s a big victory that the committee gave its support to my legislation to base payments on the real costs of running a doctors’ office instead of some outdated, ill-conceived formula. This makes it easier for doctors to open practices and stay in practice in states like Iowa.  It will help improve the quality of life for seniors by providing greater access to local medical care.

I also won passage of my amendment to require members of Congress and their staffs to access health insurance through the exchange that would be created in the Finance Committee reform bill.  The more that Congress experiences the laws we pass, the better the laws are likely to be.  My interest in having Congress participate in the exchange is consistent with my long-held view that Congress should live under the same laws it passes for the rest of the country.  My Congressional Accountability Act, that President Clinton signed into law in 1995, applied 12 civil rights, labor and workplace safety laws to Congress for the first time ever.  Congress had previously exempted itself from all of those laws.