tv Senator Schumer on Federal Spending and Health Care CSPAN May 5, 2017 12:42am-12:56am EDT
uniform. and on the military funding, mr. president, we broke out of the years long insistence for our colleagues on the other side of every increase in the head in increase on the domestic side. and as i outlined this includes other conservative priorities as well. importantly, it achieves these while the spending caps and bureaucracy even consolidating, eliminating or resending funds from over 150 government programs and initiatives. because of hard work from both chambers and both sides of the ioc have a funding bill that can make many important and positive impacts in the lives of the people that we represent. to i know i will be supporting it and i would urge the colleagues to do the same. i look forward so that we can send the agreement to president
trump for his signature.. >> the house approved the o omnibus appropriations bill through september and the bill is the result of weeks and weekt of bipartisan bicameral negotiations in the final product that reflects the give and take of the negotiations. again, i want to think the majority leader for life is hard work and the desire to come to a good agreement as well as the of house leaders and the leadership of the appropriations committees. it is proof to many that washington can work when we work together. in my view this as a good bill for the american people. not only does it explicitly preclude funding for an unnecessary and ineffective border wall, it excludes over 160 plays and help writers and increase its investments and programs that the middle class relies on mike medical research, education and infrastructure of the national institute of health would get an additional $2 billion on the cancer moonill shot.
thanks to the hard work of joe manchin and so many others. funding to shore up the medicare program and the mechanism to allow them to restructure debt and funding to help states like california, west virginia, louisiana and north carolina recover from natural disasters and it is a good increase which i will talk about at the end of my remarks or my colleagues from florida to speak about the mark and the successful work that he is done ohe's done on a budget. of course, the bill doesn'tin include all the things we want.
it doesn't include all the things our republican want. that is the nature of compromise. but at the end of the day this is an agreement that reflectsh the basic principles and is something both democrats and republicans should support. the bill shows how bipartisanship should work both parties and negotiating in good faith in order to find a consensus. it passed in the house with an overwhelming bipartisan majority 390 votes and i expect it will receive the senate approval, i later today. more broadly, i hope this deal provides a blueprint for future budget negotiations between the two parties here in congress at the four corners, the senate and house, democrats and republicann work as well on the 2018 budget as we did in the 2017 digit we will have a product we can be p proud of with no worries about any kind of government shutdown.
now on health care mr. president. as the house plans to vote on the new version of trump care later today i just want to remind the american people of a few things. we are now on the second nature attempt to pass the care and while the focus in the media has been on the changes, we shouldn't forget the bad things that stay in the bill and what they would mean for millions ofl americans.de under the new bill as the old, it would mean that premiums go up 20% in the first years the average costs go up by over mi class and if you are struggling to make it into the middle it could go up by three or $4,000. it would mean insurers can charge five times or even more now the amount it charges
younger folks even as bad as ith was for the members of the aarp and senior citizen throughout america. this bill makes that worse. it would devastate medicaid. a program covering 68 million americans. and that affects poor people in the inner cities, but also affects people in nursing homes and the young men and women, 45 or 50 who have parents in nursing homes are going to haveo to face an awful choice. more money out of their pockets or their parents would find another place to live. it would still mean, worst of all, 24 million fewer americans would have health insurance. this minor change made by the house last minute doesn't change any of those things.ca the same reason when we got to
the 17% of the american people would even have less support. and all the while, to pay for this, all the while, all the cuts in depth with the massive a tax break to the wealthiest americans, those making over $250,000 a year, multimillionaires, billionaires0 executives get a tax break while middle-class and older americans get the short end of the stick here we are telling average americans that they will get moe less coverage so we can give the multimillionaires that huge tax break. who would be for that as more and more americans find out it's way to be much less popular even
than it is today, and it is vern unpopular today. it's hard to get lower than that, but i think as people learn more and more about this bill it will get even lower. so, the house republicans have had an amendment that makes the build even more cool and it would allow states to opt out of the requirements to cover folks with pre-existing conditions for the services they need. pre-existing condition and live in a state that doesn't keep the requirement for only option might be a poorly subsidized rememb forced to to wait in line. they didn't actually exist in the obamacare but they might with trump.
it means the insurance company could charge an older american nearly five times more than the amount that they are charged under the bill. it would take us back to the days when insurance companies could price six people out of insurance and drive to bankruptcy by chargingcans outlandish rates. that's what they did with the bill and its unfathomable. we don't even know how these changes will be because we don't have the score but can anyone imagine that this amendment a would result in more americans being in church, does anyone imagine that it would provide a better coverage for americans with pre-existing conditions, i don't think so. so, that explains why republican colleagues in the house are rushing through with hardly any,
debate. they don't want the american people to see this bill. if they didn't pass the bill today, their members would go on for two weeks on a recess over in the house, ge gets beaten upy their constituents. 17% of americans, only 17% approved. the rest had town hall meetingst public forums. r they stopped the first proposal from even receiving a vote.
so now republicans are trying to speak through the without debate or any analysis of what it would mean for the country. maybe it raises the cost evenous more. maybe it doubles the amount of uninsured americans. the house won't know before voting on the bill. i sincerely hope if this bill passes, and i pray that ithe doesn't, the senate will not mimic the house and try to rush a bill through without hearings or debate or analysis. mr. president, regardless of thi process, it is a breathtakingly irresponsible piece of legislation that would endanger americans and break the bank fou i don't know what my friends in the house would say to their 56-y
this bill. what would you say to a 56-year-old in your district is already struggling to balance the cost of medicine and went with groceries when she has to pay more than five times as much of healthcare they aske have sol that is 35 and healthy. what would you say to another in your district whose daughter had cancer and is worried that if she ever lapses in coverage and insurance company could raise the rate and she couldn't afford to get health insurance for her daughter and would have to watch her suffer, the agony that aha parent would go through. what do you say to that mother? i don't know how any of my colleagues here and in the senate get this bill and now in the house can explain why they c voted to break away people's healthcare. if there's a hippocratic oath for congress do no harm, trump
care would never come up for a w vote. it doesn't have to be this way. republicans could drop these efforts for the repeal, drop the attempts that are undermining the health care system and causing them to flee the marketplace and work with democrats on improving the health-care system. our door is always moving. open. so i would make one final plea to my republican friends in the house. i know they rarely listen to thi senate leaders especially democratic ones but thidemocratn issue so much is at stake i hope they forget the party labels at the moment. i ask them to do what thee representatives should do, something very simple. think about your constituents,on consult your conscience before you vote for this bill. i believe they do and they woult consider what every association is saying about this bill and
what it would mean for the health-care system. they will come to the right conclusion and vote no today. >> today the president of the united airlines testified at a hearing about the state of air travel and airline customer service. he answered questions about the customer service and apologized for a recent incident where a passenger was dragged off a united flight by airport police. this is just over two hours.