GRASSLEY: Hello, everybody. I'm a little bit late because I just got done voting on an amendment.
Today, the White House announced another agreement with health care industry group related to health care reform. Today was with three major hospital groups.
My concern with this idea is that it does not do anything to address the geographic inequity in Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement rates, which rural providers often get paid less than urban providers for the very same procedure.
What's more, the deal abandons a promise made by Barack Obama when he was a candidate in a letter that he sent to the National Rural Health Association last October, and this was obviously when he was running for president. His letter, and I quote, "Extending insurance coverage is a hollow victory if there's no facilities or providers available. That's why I will take concrete steps to address this geographic inequity," end of quote from President Obama.
In the Senate, I'm continuing my efforts to find common ground for a bipartisan health care reform bill, and I'm doing that with the chairman, Senator Baucus. We want to do it right. The health care system is more than 17 percent of our economy, so the repercussions of a reform bill are very massive.
We want to make fixes that drive down growing health care costs, and these are unsustainable for our employers and employees, and we want to have the market work so that people without insurance coverage today are able to have access to the system and to get affordable coverage.
I'm ready for questions. And who's -- who's calling the names?
STAFF: I am, Senator. It's Casey.
GRASSLEY: Yes.
STAFF: Tom Beaumont, Des Moines Register?
BEAUMONT: Hi, Senator. I wanted to ask you about the House- passed energy bill and what you think the prognosis for a bill like it in the Senate that keeps in tact that system of allowances, what's the prognosis for that?
GRASSLEY: Well, before I give you a prognosis, it happens that this very day on a very small part of it, our Finance Committee had a hearing on the international trade implications and WTO implications of anything that has -- like the House bill has in it -- import duties if we are importing things from countries that are not having a program to get CO-2 down like we do in this country. And I made my opening statement and asked some questions.
And then, another predecessor to answering your question, but partly answering your question is the fact that last Friday, as the House was passing the bill, Senator Reid, the majority leader, said something along the lines that indicated to me that the votes weren't there yet. He didn't really say it wasn't coming up this year, but when I look at the rest of July until August the 8th and then everything after Labor Day, including probably 10 days out for Thanksgiving and then getting up to two weeks for Christmas, we only have about 15 to 17 weeks left this year that we're going to be in session.
So with health care reform, all of the appropriation bills, and probably some banking regulatory reform, I don't know that there would be time for it to come up even with -- even with -- even if we didn't do some of those things.
So bottom line of it: I don't think it's going to come up this year. A push to get it to come up this year is the Congress ought to do something before the Copenhagen treaty, and let me give you my personal view now that I've been a long-time advocate for an international agreement, because the line goes on our passing a bill something like this. "We ought to pass a bill to set a -- a tone for the rest of the countries to follow, and particularly at Copenhagen."
But if they don't follow, then we're going to be Uncle Sucker. We're going to be outsourcing more manufacturing jobs to China. And we need an international agreement that hits China with a reduction of CO-2 as much as we do, because they're putting more into the air than we do.
Bottom line: If we do it by ourselves, we're not going to make a difference in CO-2, and we had official testimony from EPA yesterday on that point, on the EPA director, Jackson, on that point.
BEAUMONT: A follow-up. Outside of the international trade issue area, there's -- there's got to be a lot of ways in which Finance would have authority over this legislation anyway, over the system of trading the allowances. I mean, doesn't -- doesn't -- tell me how much influence Finance would have over this issue in the end.
GRASSLEY: Probably only a smaller degree than we have over the health care bill, in the sense that it's divided between us and HELP. We're financing the whole thing, so it gives us great leverage. And we're -- we're going to decide how to finance cap and trade.
But we don't have much jurisdiction over the policy like we do on health care. The rest of that policy is Senator Baucus' -- or Senator Boxer's committee.
BEAUMONT: Because, as you know, in Iowa, the -- the energy utilities are -- are unhappy with the -- the system of allowances in saying that it would disproportionately hurt Midwestern coal-burning states. Does it seem to you that -- that, in the Senate, senators could -- could more likely scuttle that part of the legislation by bonding together?
GRASSLEY: Well, it's -- it's got a lot of trouble in the Senate, particularly from Midwest and plains states to -- to move ahead in this direction, and for the very reason you stated. It's unfair.
You know, the votes for it in the House of Representatives were pretty much along the coast, coastal states, where they got natural gas and/or hydropower. And so it's very serious economic infringement on job creation in the middle part of the country.
BEAUMONT: Thanks.
STAFF: James Lynch, Cedar Rapids Gazette?
LYNCH: Morning, Senator. I wanted to ask you about the stimulus plan and what your assessment is after five -- five months after its passage. Are you seeing the jobs being created? Are you seeing any economic impact from the stimulus plan?
GRASSLEY: None whatsoever, although I don't dispute that maybe 150,000 jobs are created, but the negative distraction from that comes from the fact that we needed the stimulus because the president said otherwise unemployment would get over 8 percent. Well, it's 9.5 percent, and it's going to go to 10 percent.
And so I don't think it's working. And I don't -- and I think the fact that it isn't working, it throws cold water on what Paul Krugman and -- and Ms. Tyson said over the weekend, that we need -- we need another stimulus. I don't see that it's going to fly.
And one of the problems with this stimulus is that only half of it's being spent when it needs to be spent, in 2009 and 2010. The other one-half of it's being spent in out-years.
STAFF: Mike Glover, A.P.?
Joe Morton, Omaha World-Herald?
WHO Radio?
QUESTION: Senator, would you like to have Sarah Palin come campaign for you this next time around?
GRASSLEY: The answer is, if she can raise a lot of money for me, yes. And -- and I would -- and I would only ask her to come for a major fundraiser, but I presume maybe the party would be ahead on -- of me on making that request.
But I think she has quite a following in Iowa. And maybe I'm impressed because at three events I spent with her in Iowa during the last campaign, she had bigger turnouts than McCain had.
STAFF: Courtney Blanchard, Dubuque Telegraph-Herald?
Tim Rohwer, Council Bluffs Daily Nonpareil?
ROHWER: Yes, Senator. What's your thoughts -- have you met Al Franken yet? And what's your thoughts? Is it now, what, 60 Democrats in the Senate?
GRASSLEY: Yes, there -- there are 60 Democrats, two absent because of illness -- Byrd and Kennedy at this point -- so there's only 58 present. And you know what? My first opportunity to meet him was the day during these two votes, and he's such a new fixture in the Senate, and I never even thought about looking for him.
But I'm going to make a point of -- of introducing myself and becoming better acquainted, because you've got to -- you owe it to your colleagues to know him as best you can.
ROHWER: But could this have an impact on filibusters or...
GRASSLEY: Yes. If Kennedy and -- and Byrd come back and there are 60 of them here at one time, it's going to nullify the Republican minority only to the extent that we can convince some Democrats not to stick together, and the whole purpose of the United States Senate, which is the only political institution that protects minority points of view, because the House of Representatives doesn't do it. Anything partisan can pass the House any time. They can even tell you almost to the minute when it's going to pass.
In the Senate, because of filibusters and -- and length of debate and -- and no limit on amendments for the most part, you know, you never know when anything's going to pass. And that's how you protect minority rights. And that's how the Senate is distinctly different than the House.
And where the -- the institution of the Senate was created for the purpose of slowing down legislation to give it deeper consideration so that the transient views of a -- or the views of a transient majority, changing from day to day, would not just automatically sweep through and become law.
STAFF: Christinia Crippes, Burlington Hawkeye?
CRIPPES: Hi. Thank you, Senator. I was reading an article in Politico the other day that said that you're one of the last hopes the Democrats have of making the health care reform bill bipartisan. And I was wondering if you see that pressure on either side of the aisle trying to sway you and -- and whether they'll have any luck getting your support?
GRASSLEY: Well, I'm still in that position of the only conservative at the table. And I am trying to push for bipartisanship. And as far as I know, the process of bipartisanship is still going on with a 1 o'clock meeting tomorrow.
But also, you probably would have seen some reports, 5:30 last night and since, that it looks like Senator Reid is throwing some cold water on bipartisanship.
And -- and I'm sure -- I haven't talked to Senator Baucus since these reports come out, but I'm sure he's very frustrated, because he's trying to build a supermajority to get, you know, true bipartisanship, to get a filibuster-proof piece of legislation, and I'm part of that process.
And we think that -- that maybe Reid -- and, by the way, it's too bad you aren't interviewing me an hour from now, because I'm going to have a meeting with Reid on this very subject, because we don't know what he's up to and we want to find out what he's up to.
But, you know, we've been working in such a bipartisan way that probably 80 percent or 90 percent of a bill's put together, there's still some controversial things out there. But, you know, we've had -- we could have a good product.
And it looks to me like the Democrats don't want bipartisanship because of the pressure they're getting from their left who want the government to run everything, either directly through a single payer, like Canada has, which is a government-run health care system, or doing it through the backdoor through what's called a public option.
CRIPPES: Thank you.
STAFF: Dennis Lowe, Radio 1540?
OK, I've read through the entire list. Was anyone added late or does anyone have a follow-up?
GRASSLEY: OK, thank you all very much. Goodbye.