May 4, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD— SENATE S6159 

Helms 

Hutchison 

Inhofe 

Jeffords 

Kassebaum 

Kempthorne 

Kyl 

Lieberman 

Lott 

Lugar 

Mack 

McCain 

McConnell 

Murkowski 

Nickles 

Pressler 

Santorum 

Smith 

Snowe 

Stevens 

Thomas 

Thurmond 

Warner 

NAYS—52 

Akaka 

Baucus 

Biden 

Bingaman 

Boxer 

Bradley 

Breaux 

Bryan 

Bumpers 

Byrd 

Cochran 

Cohen 

Conrad 

D’Amato 

Daschle 

Dodd 

Dorgan 

Feingold 

Feinstein 

Ford 

Glenn 

Graham 

Harkin 

Heflin 

Hollings 

Inouye 

Johnston 

Kennedy 

Kerrey 

Kerry 

Kohl 

Lautenberg 

Leahy 

Levin 

Mikulski 

Moseley-Braun 

Moynihan 

Murray 

Nunn 

Packwood 

Pryor 

Reid 

Robb 

Rockefeller 

Roth 

Sarbanes 

Shelby 

Simon 

Simpson 

Specter 

Thompson 

Wellstone 

NOT VOTING—1 

Pell 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. On this 

vote, the yeas are 47, the nays are 52. 

Three-fifths of the Senators duly chosen and sworn not having voted in the 

affirmative, the motion is not agreed 

to. 

Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, I 

move to reconsider the vote by which 

the motion was rejected. 

Mr. FORD. I move to lay that motion 

on the table. 

The motion to lay on the table was 

agreed to. 

Mr. BRADLEY addressed the Chair. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Jersey. 

Mr. BRADLEY. Madam President, I 

ask unanimous consent to proceed as if 

in morning business. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without 

objection, it is so ordered. 

Mr. BRADLEY. I thank the Chair. 

(The remarks of Mr. BRADLEY pertaining to the introduction of S. 759 are 

located in today’s RECORD under 

‘‘Statements on Introduced Bills and 

Joint Resolutions.’’) 

Mr. BENNETT addressed the Chair. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Utah is recognized. 

Mr. BENNETT. I ask unanimous consent that I be allowed to continue for 

up to 15 minutes as in morning business. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without 

objection, it is so ordered. 

f 

MEDICARE’S IMPENDING 

BANKRUPTCY 

Mr. BENNETT. Madam President, 

last evening, as I sat in the chair, the 

distinguished minority leader came on 

the floor and made a statement about, 

among other things, Medicare. There 

were many of the things he said on 

that occasion with which I disagree 

and so I take this opportunity, while 

my memory is still fresh on the minority leader’s comments, to register my 

disagreement. 

The reason I am doing it this quickly, and I hope this completely, is because I believe that the issue of Medicare’s impending bankruptcy is so important that we should not allow statements that are incorrect to stay on the 

RECORD uncorrected. We should make 

sure this debate is as careful and as 

correct as it can possibly be. The 

stakes are much too high for this debate to take place in an atmosphere 

that some might consider demagogic. 

I will take several of the minority 

leader’s statements now and respond to 

them specifically. The first one: He 

said—and I am quoting from this morning’s CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, page 6128: 

Republicans have discovered that the 

Medicare Program faces challenges in the 

years ahead. Democrats told them and the 

Nation that 2 years ago when we shored up 

the Medicare Program and cut the deficit, 

all without Republican votes. 

Madam President, I apologize for not 

having this particular chart made up in 

a chart big enough to show the world. 

Perhaps the television can pick it up 

for those that are watching. But I am 

sure those in the Chamber can at least 

see the direction of the curve, which is 

the hospital insurance trust fund balance, in billions, starting in 1994; it 

goes up slightly in 1995 and then begins 

a precipitous plunge to zero in the year 

2002. 

The reason I hold this chart up is because the minority leader has said, 

‘‘Democrats told the Nation that 2 

years ago.’’ This chart, Madam President, became available on April 5, 1995, 

not necessarily 2 years ago. 

I sat in the Chamber in the other 

body when the President of the United 

States addressed the House of Representatives in September 1993, roughly 

2 years ago, and gave a masterful discourse on health care. He did not mention anything relating to the facts contained in this chart. 

If, in fact, Democrats told Members 

this 2 years ago, the President of the 

United States neglected to mention it 

when he made his statement to the 

joint session of Congress. 

I will not claim to have participated 

in all portions of the health care debate last year. I do not think any Member can make that claim. I watched the 

health care debate very closely. I cannot recall a single instance where a 

single Democratic spokesman told 

Members in last year’s debate that the 

Medicare trust fund was in any kind of 

trouble. 

The minority leader talked about the 

budget. I participated in the budget debate when the new administration 

came in. The adoption of the budget of 

which the minority leader is so proud, 

and I cannot recall—and I would like to 

have him point out to me if I am 

wrong—a single instance during that 

budget debate where the Democrats 

told Members that this trust fund was 

headed for disaster, indeed, extinct, in 

the year 2002. 

I think the minority leader is incorrect when he says the Republicans are 

just discovering something that the 

world has known and that the Democrats openly told Members about 2 

years ago. 

Second, he says: 

House Republicans are considering reductions in Medicare growth on the order of $300 

billion. Senate Republicans have said they 

will need to reduce normal Medicare growth 

by $200 to $250 billion. 

Then he goes on to say this is normal 

growth; the Republicans are cutting 

this growth in a way that is irresponsible. 

What he does not tell Members is 

that during the health care debate last 

Congress, the President himself projected that we needed to reduce Medicare by $118 billion. I am not going to 

quibble with him—yes, the $200 billion 

figure that is talked about in the Senate now is obviously much higher than 

the $118 figure that the President 

talked about. 

The point is that the President, in 

last year’s debate, and Democrats on 

this floor in last year’s debate said, 

‘‘We must reduce Medicare,’’ and the 

figure the President came up with was 

$118 billion. 

I do not think it is appropriate to say 

the Republicans have suddenly discovered the idea of reducing Medicare in 

the hundreds of billions of dollars, and 

is that not terrible, when the President 

himself was saying we have to reduce 

Medicare from the projected rates by 

in excess of $100 billion. That was OK, 

then. Now, Republicans are being 

bashed. 

The one I feel the most strongly 

about, Madam President, is this statement where the minority leader said: 

Medicare Program costs are increasing because all health insurance costs are increasing. In fact, on a per capita basis, Medicare 

and Medicaid costs are increasing at the 

same rate as privately insured costs. 

On this one, Madam President, I did 

go to the chart makers and I have produced a chart. I will put it here and 

share it with the Members of the Senate and ask unanimous consent that 

the figures contained in this table be 

printed in the RECORD following my 

Statement. 

(See exhibit No. 1.) 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without 

objection, it is so ordered. 

Mr. BENNETT. Here are medical expenditures. The dark figure—no metaphor intended—the dark figure is for 

public expenditures for health care; the 

light figure is for private expenditures. 

The expenditures are calculated in 

terms of percentage growth. That is, if 

we look at 1985, in that year, public expenditures for health care went up at a 

rate of 8.8 percent per year, while private expenditures went up 10.3 percent. 

We can see in these years there is a disparity. 

Some years public ones go up faster 

than private; other years private expenditures go up substantially faster 

than public expenditures. We can see 

that, in general terms, it is around 8 or 

9 percent in public expenditures and 

slightly more than that in private expenditures. 

mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS

S6160 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD— SENATE May 4, 1995 

Then in 1989, something happened. In 

1989, the rate of increase for public expenditures went to its highest level—

11.9 percent; private levels going up at 

10.3 percent. Then, in 1990, public expenditures went up 13.2 percent; for the 

second year in a row, public expenditures went up faster than private, a 

trend that has continued to this day 

unabated. 

In 1991, public expenditures are still 

up in the double digits—12.6 percent, 

but market forces are beginning to assert themselves in the private marketplace, and the private expenditures 

only increased 5.6 percent. It did not 

stay down that low the next year. They 

came up to 6.9; but public expenditures 

stayed in double digits at 10.8 percent. 

Now they have been getting better. 

In 1993, public expenditures 8.5, but private is 7.2. In 1994, public expenditures 

come down to 7.8; but private drops to 

5.3 percent. 

For the minority leader to say that 

the reason we cannot do something 

about the expanding growth of Medicare is because Medicare expenditures 

are going up at the same rate as private expenditures, is to ignore the 

facts of the case. 

Private expenditures are coming 

down in terms of the percentage 

growth at a faster rate than public expenditures are coming down. Indeed, 

Madam President, if we were to take 

the minority leader’s statement at face 

value, where he says: 

Medicare Program costs are increasing because all health care insurance costs are increasing on a per capita basis. Medicare and 

Medicare costs are increasing at the same 

rate as privately insured costs. 

If that statement were true, that 

would mean that Medicare and Medicaid costs would be increasing at 5.3 

percent per year, which figure, Madam 

President, is within the band the Budget Committee is considering for increases for Medicare and Medicaid. 

I have sat in on the budget briefing 

and I have heard the budgeteers say, 

‘‘If only we could get the rate of increase down to 5 percent, we could 

solve all of our problems.’’ The rate of 

increase is down to 5 percent in private 

expenditures. 

The minority leader thinks the two 

are the same. Perhaps he has them confused and thinks that the private people have not done a good enough job 

and the private expenditures are up in 

this kind of level for public expenditures. In fact, they are not. They have, 

ever since 1989, come down at a faster 

rate than the public expenditures come 

down and they are leading the way. 

This is the point we need to keep in 

mind, then, Madam President, with respect to Medicare and the reforms that 

are necessary. We cannot demagog this 

issue. We must stick with the facts. 

Our goal is to make the system that 

takes care of our elderly as stable, as 

secure, and as certain for the future as 

the system that takes care of the rest 

of the population. 

If we can do it as responsible public 

servants at the same rate of increase 

that exists in the rest of the population, we can solve all of our budgetary problems and the disastrous circumstance indicated in this table will 

go away. 

Madam President, I have nothing but 

respect for our distinguished minority 

leader. I consider him a friend and one 

of the more reasonable and certainly 

most thoughtful Members of this body. 

I feel that the information that he 

shared with the Senate last night is inaccurate, and it becomes Members in 

this debate to make sure that the 

record is set straight as quickly as possible, because the stakes in this debate 

are so high. 

I thank the Chair. I yield the floor. 

EXHIBIT NO. 1. 

CBO estimates for total medical and health 

care spending in the public and private sector from 1985 until 1994. The figures include 

spending for administrative costs, construction, and research and development as well 

as personal health care costs associated with 

doctors and hospitals. The figures shown represent a percentage increase over the previous year’s spending level. 

MEDICAL EXPENDITURES 

Year Public 

(percent) 

Private 

(percent) 

1985 .............................................................................. 8.8 10.3 

1986 .............................................................................. 8.9 6.1 

1987 .............................................................................. 8.9 8.5 

1988 .............................................................................. 9.0 12.6 

1989 .............................................................................. 11.9 10.3 

1990 .............................................................................. 13.2 10.6 

1991 .............................................................................. 12.6 5.6 

1992 .............................................................................. 10.8 6.9 

1993 .............................................................................. 8.5 7.2 

1994 .............................................................................. 7.8 5.3 

Source: CRS. 

Mr. GORTON. Madam President, I 

suggest the absence of a quorum. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The 

clerk will call the roll. 

The bill clerk proceeded to call the 

roll. 

Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I ask 

unanimous consent that the order for 

the quorum call be rescinded. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. 

SANTORUM.) Without objection, it is so 

ordered. 

The Senator from Utah is recognized. 

Mr. HATCH. I thank the Chair. 

(The remarks of Mr. HATCH and Mr. 

PRYOR, pertaining to the introduction 

of S. 758 are located in today’s RECORD

under ‘‘Statements on Introduced Bills 

and Joint Resolutions.’’) 

Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I see no 

other Senator seeking recognition at 

this time. Therefore, I yield the floor. 

I suggest the absence of a quorum. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The 

clerk will call the roll. 

The bill clerk proceeded to call the 

roll. 

Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask 

unanimous consent that the order for 

the quorum call be rescinded. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without 

objection, it is so ordered. 

REGARDING A PRIVATE VISIT BY 

PRESIDENT LEE TENG-HUI, OF 

THE REPUBLIC OF CHINA ON 

TAIWAN, TO THE UNITED 

STATES 

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed 

to the immediate consideration of 

House Concurrent Resolution 53, expressing the sense of Congress regarding a private visit by the President of 

the Republic of China on Taiwan to the 

United States. 

Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I am 

sorry I have to do this, but in behalf of 

another Senator who could not be here 

at this time, I do object. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard. 

Mr. DOLE. I thank the Chair. 

f 

THE SENATE CHAMBER DESKS—A 

BRIEF HISTORY 

Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, recently 

I announced that I was not going to be 

seeking another term in the Senate. It 

has been a wonderful opportunity these 

last 161⁄2 years to serve in this great 

body, to be serving with all of my great 

colleagues and friends from all the 50 

States, and all the wonderful staff people that make this place run. I just 

want to thank all of them so much for 

their many kindnesses shown to me. 

Mr. President, I was cleaning out my 

desk a while ago and just looking 

through something I have had in my 

desk for some time that was prepared 

by some of the individuals, I think, in 

the Historian’s office. That is not the 

proper name for those who prepared 

this. But I thought while there were interested parties involved, I might read 

a few pages of some of the history of 

the desks in this Chamber. This is a 

brief history. 

When British troops burned the U.S. Capitol in 1814 during the War of 1812, they severely damaged the Senate Chamber and destroyed the original furnishings. The rebuilt 

Chamber was completed in 1819 and the Senate ordered 48 new desks at a cost of $34 each 

from Thomas Constantine. A New York cabinetmaker, he also constructed desks for the 

House of Representatives. Many of these 

early desks remain in use in the Senate 

Chamber today. As new states have entered 

the Union over the years, additional desks of 

identical design have been built and placed 

in use. 

Throughout most of the 19th century a senator’s only office was his desk on the Senate 

floor, 

We did not have, I might say, the 

Senate office buildings. This was our 

office, the desk that was on the Senate 

floor. 

but gradually separate rooms were assigned. 

The earliest offices were Committee rooms 

occupied by their chairmen; additional space 

later became available under the Olmsted 

Terraces on the West Front of the Capitol. 

Finally, with the completion of the first Senate office building [the Russell Building] in 

1909, all senators were able to occupy suitable offices on Capitol Hill. 

Over the years, modifications have been 

made to the Chamber desks to provide more 

room for books and papers. Beginning in the 

mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS