dr. coburn would like the swiss model. i think that would be fine, but i do not think we will ever get the insurance companies to say okay to that. caller: my question is -- i am on medicare and that is my only insurance. i recently had a device put in and i had my bill from the hospital that was $29,000 for an overnight stay. i was speaking to my brother-in- law. he had a stint put in with a private hospital and private insurance in his bill was $190,000 and he stay overnight. can you explain to me how there can be that much difference in the same procedure? guest: that is a wonderful question and it shows how ridiculous our health-care system is in this country. neither bill means much. the bills do not reflect what the hospital cost. it reflects how the hospital games out there charges. they are allowed to charge a certain amount for insurance companies and a certain amount for medicare. i remember -- my dad passed away in 2001. i remember getting his bills. i'm a physician. is so hard to understand those things. the me

the truth is, the same people like dr. coburn who argue against the public health option, there republican conservative ancestors were against medicare. medicare has turned out great. it is not perfect, but there are millions of seniors all over the country who would not have health insurance if it were not for medicare. all we are asking is to

senator mikulski and and i dr. coburn as well had a very lively discussion about the intent of this language. senator mikulski said that the intent of the language was to keep the right to make treatment decisions with the doctor and the patient, not with the government. i certainly agree with that. and senator mikulski has worked long and hard on this bill and i respect her for that. she is a good expleeg a good friend -- good colleague and a good friend, and i agree with this intent. but as i pointed out to the senator, the language in the kennedy-dodd bill does not accomplish our common intent.

i have appreciated dr. coburn's insights in the house and here and have enjoyed hearing his comments. i want to just take off on something senator mikulski said about using the word bureaucrat. i don't have a lot of federal employees in my state relative to some other states, but we use the word bureau crass in discussing and dehumanizing and delegitimizing decisions we don't so often use the word bureaucrat talking about insurance company automotonss or lower level people or whatever denying care. from the view point of comparative effectiveness, they're denying care based on -- not denying care. they are basing questions based on legitimate scientific evidence when it's insurance companies, private experience companies, bureaucrats that might be denying care based on profit. so i just hope that we are a little more careful in words we use to describe human beings that work in these agencies or that work in insurance companies and look more at the end product. and that's all i would have to say. >> point w

i would remind you that dr dr. coburn over here indicated that exercise -- with appropriate exercise you gain 20% more in intelligence cog any distance. i think with what you've had to do this afternoon, listening to virtually all of us saying the same thing over and over and over again, it might be time for a seventh inning stretch. but don't do that because i'm the last speaker. and with all due respect to my colleag colleagues, i've never seen such three sad sacks in my life trying very hard not to fall asleep hearing the same thing over and over and over again. that also goes for the staff in the back who are now you starting to come awake. let me give you just a hint. this has nothing to do with the bill. maybe it does. if you find yourself falling asleep -- and i used to do this when i was chairman of several committees -- i would hold my feet about one inch off of the deck like this. and you cannot fall asleep with both of your feet raised above the deck. you might give it a try. >> depends which of my colle

. >> dr. coburn had just give tonight chairman the extra paragraph that would protect a dissemination on all of that to doctors and then if we could combine that language to the language that we had worked on for the senator from maryland and myself, we were that close in this debate about reaching a conclusion. i don't know if the ranking member could tell me what the difference is between a voice vote and i guess if you have it recorded, you lock it up and you put it on a bookshelf and you never take the book back. >> i just got the language and i appreciate tomkoburn submitting it, like any language, words are important, and i think a good suggestion, but rather than just accepting this today and at this very moment, we could take a little consideration. >> can we accept the vote. >> shut the thing down. >> well, the difference is the authority would be then locked in with their vote and i prefer not to lock them in until they get to see the alternate language. they see the light. >> mr. ch

coburn as well as the position and i really thank you for that. that is a 15 year-old debate that one on and we're going to have some regulation of that industry which is a major step and prevention said thank you. >> thank you mr. chairman, thank you for your leadership on that issue and so many. and your willingness i guess to step up. i don't know how many options you had when senator kennedy calls and asks you to take over the reins. but it is appreciated it recognizing which you have in front of you the wake of this task, the responsibility i think we would all agree that in terms of the issues that are first and foremost on the minds of americans, if it is not the impact of the economy on a daily lives is health care. and how that impacts of the family budget and decisions that are made in the expectation is real and substantive that we. congress will deal with health care reform. but how is that translated, how a person like tricia urban reckoning is is that this is meaningful health-care reform as opposed to when a person in a very small r

. >> i appreciate dr. coburn's question and i always appreciate the comments he makes because they're genuine and thought through. i don't think you're doing this -- i think your amendments have been cogent and coherent and well stud did and well reasoned, but delay -- you know, this is something we've been working on for decades. i mean, we've worked on intensively on this legislation per say with what senator arkin is doing and mikulski and senator murray on each section. but we've been working intensively for months and years on these issues. we know these issues. we know how to discuss them, by and large how they're going to work. let's wait -- people say we shouldn't do health care now because the economy is so bad. but then when the economy is good, we shouldn't do health care because the economy is good. senator dodd, i think, has done this masterfully when, you know, certainly not hurrying anything through their amendments, not hurrying anybody through their opens statements. i sat through a lot of

i think what dr. coburn is focused on his words that we all have selectively used, transparency, accountability, and he treats the health care services commission. it does do away with the hq r cube-- ahrq but it is transformed and i thought that was in the spirit with which we were engaging in a debate on healthcare reform, that we needed to look at things and change them so that they worked in the 21st century. senator coburn's focus on technology on the ability to get real data in the hands of patients, the customers of healthcare. a hsc's purpose is to enhance the quality, the appropriateness and effectiveness of the healthcare services. through the publication of quality and price information. now, we may have a disagreement as to whether we are doing away with work that somebody has already worked on, but make a judgment based upon whether this information is valuable to the healthcare system of the 21st century. it if it is an effort to enhance quality, enhance the display appropriateness and t

. >> dr. coburn had just given to the chairman that extra paragraph that we protect the dissemination on all that to doctors. and then, if we could combine that language to the language that we have work done, both the senator from maryland and myself, and use the word prohibit, i think we are that close with all this debate. i don't know if the ranking member can tell me what the differences between a voice spoke and i guess if you have it recorded, you lock it up and put it on the bookshelf and you don't ever take the book back. >> i just got the language. i appreciate tom coburn submitting it. words are important and i think a good suggestion, but rather than just a step in this a day at this very moment, we will take into consideration. >> the difference is the majority would then be locked in with their boat, and i would prefer not to let the men until they get to see the alternate language. >> mr. chairman, first of all, one, a voice vote or a recorded vote, whatever is the pleasure of t

coburn's ideas, they do not have to take medicare. why does that have to be the choice of the right wing of the republican party or the insurance lobby in washington? you can make that choice. why can't people under 65 who are in trouble, just like seniors were before we put in medicare, why can't they make the decision for themselves? that is why it relies on a public option that you can choose. or, you do not have to choose it or have anything to do host: with. we now go to the house accomplishments of the americorps and encouraging all citizens to join in a national effort to salute americorps members and alumni, and raise awareness about the importance of national and community service from the speaker. the clerk: the speaker's room, washington, d.c., june 10, 2009. i hereby appoint the honorable jesse l. jackson jr. to act as speaker pro tempore on this day. signed, nancy pelosi, speaker of the house of representatives. the speaker pro tempore: the prayer will be offered by our chaplain, father coughlin. chaplain coughlin: lord g

i have respect for him,nd when dr. spall -- and when dr. paul speaks, we listen. host: also, dr. tom coburn will join us tomorrow morning on the program. last call, go ahead, frank. caller: i would like to ask mr. gingrich -- host: frank, we can hear you. go ahead. caller: everything they asked for, they pushed it through. and when we get a democrat that takes over, we have a whole bunch of stuff up and everything else. he kept on for 80 years now, they push things through the way they want. they kept on for eight years now, they pushed things through that they want. every time some millionaire comes up there and once to push something through, they do it with flying colors. guest: thank you for your call. you are getting right down to the root of politics now, and certainly we only have two major parties in this country. every two years, every member of the house of representatives, all 435 of us, are up for reelection. and 1/3 of the senate, every two years. so literally, that you have this political bloodbath every two years for control. certainly, the democrats are strongly i