Nomination of Katherine Archuleta to Be Director of the Office of Personnel Management
by Senator Marco RubioPosted on 2013-10-30
Tweet
RUBIO. Mr. President, we have all now been aware over the last
few days in the news about the problems being faced with the Web site
upon which people are supposed to go in order to sign up to be on one
of these exchanges. That is important, because next year Americans are
going to owe money to the IRS if they do not have health insurance by a
certain date.
One of the ways people are supposed to get health insurance is by
going on one of those Web sites and logging on, registering, and being
able to see what their options are for insurance, and then signing up.
If you do not do that, then you are going to owe money to the IRS next
year.
The problem is those Web sites are not working. In fact, just today
as the Secretary was testifying before a House committee, the Web site
crashed again. There are a lot of different reasons why that is
happening. I am sure eventually, with all of the experts who are
involved in it, they will be able to set up a Web site that functions,
because this is the 21st century. The ability to go online and buy
something, frankly, is something people do every single day with all
kinds of things. So to me, it is inexplicable that they are not able to
do that when it comes to health insurance.
But in the meantime, people are struggling not just with the Web
site, by the way, there are problems now with the 800 number and the
paper application.
I believe the prudent approach is to say we are going to delay, that
we are going to put off punishing people, that we are going to put off
the individual mandate until the Web site works. I will admit, I do not
think the law works at all in its totality and it will eventually have
to be repealed. That is what I favor. But in the interim, what I am
proposing is something that I think is pretty reasonable; that is, the
notion that until these Web sites are working, how can we punish people
for not buying health insurance? Why are we going to punish someone for
not buying health insurance if the Web site they are supposed to buy it
on, by the administration's own admission, is not properly working?
This is creating a lot of anxiety for people. That is why I filed a
bill to do that. That is why I come on the floor today for the purpose
of making a motion.
As if in legislative session, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate
proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 225, S. 1592,
which is a bill to delay the individual mandate until the health
exchanges are functioning properly. I further ask unanimous consent
that the bill be read a third time and passed, the motion to reconsider
be considered made and laid upon the table.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, I think it
is pretty clear that this motion is inappropriate. This is not what we
should be doing and how we should potentially change the act. Actually,
the effect here is to disrupt implementation of the Affordable Care
Act. The Affordable Care Act is a law. It has been in place for several
years. The Supreme Court has upheld it. Attempts to repeal it failed. I
think the House has voted up to 20 times to try to repeal the ACA. They
have all failed. The act is here. So the goal here is to make it work,
make the act work. Then later on we can ask questions about what
happened, why it didn't work, why wasn't implementation of the
exchanges as good as a lot of us would have liked it to have been. Then
find out who is responsible, et cetera. Right now it works.
The effect of this motion is severalfold. One, it will deny people
having health insurance, people who otherwise would get health
insurance. If you delay the individual responsibility requirement, it
is going to cause a delay. People will not have insurance.
Second, it is going to increase the cost of health insurance for a
lot of people. Why? Because fewer people will be signed up. The
individual responsibility requirement will not be followed as much as
otherwise would be the case. The result is fewer people will be in the
insurance pool, and therefore prices will be higher.
Another consequence is it lowers the quality of health insurance,
especially for those individuals who are seeking to be insured. They
are going to have a lower quality product as a consequence of this
request. It is an attempt to destabilize, it is an attempt to undermine
the ACA.
I think for those reasons it is inappropriate and again is another
effort to obstruct. We should not proceed in this way, so I object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
The Senator from Florida.
Mr. RUBIO. Mr. President, I do not intend to offer another motion
since the objection has been heard. I do want to point out a couple of
things. First of all, this notion that ObamaCare is the law--it is true
it is the law. It was passed by Congress in the years before I got
here. This is called the Calendar of Business. This is the Executive
Calendar. Basically every single bill that is in here is an effort to
change existing law, for the most part. That is what we do around here.
That is what the legislative process is about. Virtually every bill
that is filed is either an effort to create a new law, but usually it
is an effort to change existing law. So if we begin to argue around
here that once something is existing law it can never be changed, we
might as well close up shop, because that is what we do. That is what
the legislative process is about.
The second point that was made was that this law will prevent people
have having health insurance. That is not true. Let me say this: No. 1,
I am in favor of people having health insurance. I do think we cannot
ignore the health insurance problem this country faces.
No. 2, admittedly, I am in favor of repealing ObamaCare and replacing
it with a better alternative. But that is not what this bill does. All
this bill says--this is the only thing it says: The only thing it says
is you cannot enforce the individual mandate, you cannot tell people
next year that we will fine you, that the IRS is going to impose a fine
on you. You will not be able to do that until the Web site is fully
working.
In terms of this preventing people from getting health insurance,
that is simply not accurate. This does not prevent anyone from going
onto the Web site and signing up. If the bill I am proposing is
adopted, it would not keep
[[Page S7658]]
anybody from signing up for health insurance under ObamaCare. The only
thing it would do is keep the IRS from fining you if you are unable to
do it. The reason why that makes sense is because the way we are
supposed to do it on a Web site simply is not working.
So it is not accurate to say this will somehow prevent people from
buying health insurance. It does not. It does not prohibit you from
trying to get it on the Web site. It is just the recognition that the
Web site is not working well and there is a consequence to it. The
consequence to it is if they cannot get these Web sites up and running,
there are people who will not be able to buy health insurance and they
are going to get fined for it. That does not sound fair to me.
So while I continue to want to repeal ObamaCare, I think for the good
of our people it is unfair to continue to hold over their head the
threat of an IRS fine when the method of compliance we are asking them
to follow is not fully functioning. That is all this would do.
I would point out this is not a theoretical concern. I get letters
and emails every day. But I want to read one I got. I will paraphrase
it. It is from Barbara in Ruskin, FL. She is 63 years old. She tried to
apply to the health insurance marketplace on October 1. As of the
writing of this email, she is no further along. She sought the services
of a certified navigator on October 14. After spending hours on line
trying to get an account established and making the application, the
navigator, with her on speaker phone, after many hours finally assisted
her in making an application. She was told she would receive additional
information via email. Ten days later she has still heard nothing. She
is worried because she is currently covered, but that is being
terminated at the end of the year because of ObamaCare. It is going to
end on December 31. According to the information provided to her, she
has to be enrolled in another insurance plan or she is going to face
the fine.
This is just one example. I could go on and on. I do not want to
burden the time of the Senate. But there are thousands upon thousands
of people who are dealing with this problem.
Here is the last point I would make. I have now heard on a number of
occasions the administration say with full confidence that by the end
of this coming month, by the end of November, the Web sites will be up
and running. If that is true, then there is no reason to be against my
bill. If, in fact, you are so confident the Web sites are going to be
up and running by the end of November, then this problem will be taken
care of. If, in fact, you are right, and the Web sites are going to be
up and running at the end of November, then the mandate will be back in
effect.
The only thing my bill does is say: As long as the Web site is not
working and until it is working, you cannot enforce the ObamaCare
mandates on people through a fine from the IRS. That is it. That is all
it says. That is why I think this makes all the sense in the world. I
am surprised that we somehow believe we should continue to hold the
penalty over people's heads when the way we are asking them to comply
with the law, by the admission of the administration, by the admission
of the Secretary today, is simply not working well enough.
I hope in the days to come my colleagues will reconsider, because I
think our people, irrespective of how you feel about ObamaCare, deserve
better. To that end, I would read to you one email I got from someone
who actually supports ObamaCare. Nicholas in Palm Bay, FL, wrote an
extensive email. He talked about how he submitted an application to the
Web site. It took hours to complete because of Web issues. They finally
finished the application 23 days later. The application is still in
progress, but it will not let him go any farther to choose the
insurance. So while he does not agree with me about defunding or
repealing ObamaCare, he agrees with me that we should suspend the
individual mandate penalty until this Web site issue is fixed.
I think there are a lot of people who are going to feel that way. I
think there are a lot of people who would be shocked that the
government is going to punish them for not buying insurance when the
Web site they are being sent to buy it on does not work.
Again, I think it is a commonsense approach. I am surprised there is
objection to it. I suppose I should not be, but I am. I hope in the
days and weeks to come my colleagues will reconsider, because in my
opinion, and I think in the opinion of many Americans, it is simply
unfair.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
