STAFF: The following is an unrehearsed interview with Iowa Senator Chuck Grassley, speaking to you live from Washington. Participating in today's public affairs program are Nick Wilkens with KCII Radio in Washington and Doug Rieder with the Glidden Graphic in Glidden.
The first question will be from Nick Wilkens.
QUESTION: Senator Grassley, one of the main topics in the news as of late, over the past six or seven months, has been the health care debate. And I'm wondering what your thoughts on the new, more moderate public option that Democrats are presenting today?
GRASSLEY: Well, it could be the original public option. It could be an opt-in. It could be an opt-out for individual states, but I'm not sure that that makes much difference. I think the concept of a public option, however it happens, is very, very bad, because it's kind of like Congressman Barney Frank said, because he'd like to have a Canadian-style single-payer system, that a public option is nothing more than a Trojan horse getting to a completely government-run health care system.
And I don't think Americans want their health care system nationalized, and they're very fearful of that, considering the fact that General Motors and the banks were nationalized. And they don't want more government takeover.
It kind of boils down to when you have the government being a competitor, a funder, and a regulator, private enterprise can't hardly compete against it. And so you -- you don't have the president being able to keep his promise that he made during the campaign, if you like the insurance you have, you'll be able to keep it. So I think it's bad.
Basically, what's coming down the path now is big increases in premiums, $500 billion of tax increases, and $404 billion coming out of Medicare to set up a new government entitlement program. And a lot of people that have studied this say -- and I repeat what they said -- that's not really health care reform.
Next question?
QUESTION: Senator, concerning the recent "60 Minutes" television program story on Medicare fraud, was any of that information new to you? And what was your reaction to it?
GRASSLEY: Well, of course, the individual cases are -- are a little new, and you kind of get the impression that the government should never send a check to a box -- box -- postal box number. You shouldn't send it any place where there's not a real address. And then even then, you probably would still have a lot of fraud.
But, you know, I ought to be -- all of us ought to be somewhat embarrassed, because as I said yesterday in the Judiciary Committee where there was a hearing on this very issue, I said, in my committee, which is the Finance Committee, when I was chairman and now since Baucus is chairman, we probably held 20 hearings on this sort of issue of fraud in Medicare. When I was chairman of the Aging Committee, we did.
It seems like we just never get on top of the fraud. Now, there might be a little bit less now than there has been, because there's more enforcement. And I suppose it also ought to tell us the realism that, you know, regardless of what you do in government, there's going to be somebody that's willing to play the roulette wheel and -- and -- and they -- they're smarter than the government, and they're going to get away with it. Sometimes they get away with it forever, and sometimes they get caught.
So there's really people out there that are very sophisticated about cheating the government. But you've just got to keep on top of it, and hopefully you do. But I know this, that -- that when you have a government that's nothing but a check-writer, it's pretty easy to cheat them.
Now, we got testimony yesterday that they're -- that they got a task force set up working with the FBI and local law enforcement people, and they're going to try to stay on top of it, and I hope they get the job done, but I don't want to sit here and -- and necessarily lead you to believe that -- that we're not going to continue to have some fraud, just like you continue to have bank robberies.
QUESTION: Senator Grassley, outside of a public option, what would you be willing to support as far as health care reform is concerned?
GRASSLEY: Well, let me say that there's a good part of this bill that isn't Republican or Democrat or bipartisan. It's kind of consensus. And that part I could support, and I'll give you some examples, you know, where you use coordinated care organizations to zero in on where 75 percent of the health care dollars are spent on the five chronic diseases, diabetes being an example.
Then you -- when you have 20 percent of the people go back to the hospital 30 days after they got out, that's expensive, so we find out that follow-up care for people that leave the hospital saves a lot of money and enhances quality and the opportunities they live in. The extent to which you put emphasis upon wellness programs instead of waiting until people get sick and encouraging through insurance companies or encouraging through companies like John Deere to establish such programs, all those things and many more are very, very good, and I can support.
Now, there are some things that aren't in the bill that I think ought to be in the bill that would get my support: medical malpractice reform, to do away with frivolous lawsuits, so the expense of a doctor giving you tests you don't need because he thinks you're going to sue him would be done away with; and, also, the selling of insurance across state lines, like you do car insurance, would be very helpful.
Now, I just named five things, and there's probably 50 things I ought to name to you, things that are in the bill that I like, but things that aren't in the bill that ought to be in the bill that would get my support.
QUESTION: Senator, employee health insurance costs for, you know, everyone are, of course, a big concern, but for schools, when you're talking to area superintendents, it just -- they're so frustrated, it doesn't seem like they're able to reduce costs in any way. Their budgets are being cut; their health insurance costs are going sky high. What can be done about that?
GRASSLEY: Well, of course, don't forget, even if insurance premiums were not going up for school districts, you still are going to have problems from Iowa school districts, because the governor's cutting across the board state aid 10 percent. So either they're going to eliminate positions or they're going to have an increase in property tax. And none of those things are very helpful, and then you've got the higher premiums on top of it.
And I would say that the number-one thing we could do to help people that don't have health insurance is to make sure that they -- that you have tax deductibility for individual policies, as well as for group policies. Now, a school district would have group policies, and I don't know whether -- how this would work for them, but I know a lot of companies have done it, and I'd throw this out as a suggestion to answer your question, that they go from -- from a health insurance policy to health savings accounts, where you can put aside $5,800 -- up to $5,800 tax-free -- as long as it's used on health care, you don't ever have to pay tax on it -- and it carries over into your state, if you don't -- if you stay healthy, and then buy a catastrophic policy that fits in with it.
QUESTION: Senator Grassley, a question on foreign policy. The war in Afghanistan -- it's kind of a two-part question -- do we need to increase our troop levels there? And is this administration being overly cautious or -- or not being proactive enough in that situation?
GRASSLEY: I think they're being ambivalent and sending very bad signals to the rest of the world of whether or not the United States is really committed, not only to Afghanistan, but are we going to be committed to other obligations that we have established through treaty? And I think the president -- it's probably good that he takes time to study things out and reach a concrete decision, but I think he ought to have done it in a way that wasn't so public, that -- that he was, you know, wringing his hands.
I think that, with the death recently of about 22 Americans in a short period of time, that it shows that they need additional supplement of -- of troops and -- and that, since it's his policy that he announced in March towards Afghanistan, since he picked General McChrystal, he ought to do what General McChrystal has asked, and that's for 40,000 troops.
QUESTION: Senator, going back a few months, you had your ambassador tour to Iowa, and you were in my neck of the woods, at west central, in Rolfe, and we had people from all over the world there. I was just wondering what you feel the benefits -- have you seen tangible benefits from that?
GRASSLEY: Not from this specific trip, but if you want to go back over the 11 previous ones, over a 22-year period of time, we do see benefits from it. But we're not making business deals when you have an ambassador's tour. We're acquainting people with Iowa, so when their businesspeople from Country X comes to their embassy in Washington, that -- that -- and they want to do business in the United States, the embassy knows something about Iowa. So we're -- we're kind of setting the stage for business deals to take place.
Thank you, Nick and Doug, for participating in today's public affairs program. This has been Senator Chuck Grassley reporting to the people of Iowa. Thanks to both of you.
QUESTION: Thank you, Senator.
GRASSLEY: You bet.
END