On the recordOctober 20, 1992
Well, I would only refer you to the fact that money from the Federal Government for health care has increased dramatically. The problem you have is you don't have unlimited resources. Take AIDS funding on research, for example. We've doubled, in the last 4 years, the Federal participation in research and treatment and all of this. We're up to $4.9 billion, 10 times as much for AIDS victims as per cancer victim, what the Federal Government can do. We're operating at these enormous deficits. And so, I'd like to sit here and say, the Federal Government can solve this problem, or the Federal Government can solve the problems of urban America by spending more. I don't believe we can do it. I think the best thing the Federal Government can do is to continue to be as compassionate as possible on funding for health care. It's way up, believe me; just look at the numbers. But it's got to be done as much as possible by participation of others also. We cannot do it and then say, ``Well, I'm going to get the deficit down.'' You can't be taxed much more. So the President is faced with the problem: How do you help these hospitals for the indigent, and yet, how do you protect the taxpayer's wallet. I've concluded that we've got about the right balance for what we can do right now. Mr. Nigut. What do we spend at a Grady hospital on a baby who is born prematurely because of a lack of prenatal care?
Source
govinfo.gov




