Skip to main content

tv   U.S. House Takes First Step in ACA Repeal Approves Mattis Waiver  CSPAN  January 13, 2017 9:00am-11:01am EST

9:00 am
9:01 am
how their words and deeds affect the lives of those in need. and those who look to them for support, help, strength, and leader. -- leadership. may all that is done this day in the people's house be for your greater honor and glory, men. the speaker pro tempore: the chair has examined the journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to the house his approval thereof. journal joornl -- the gentleman from georgia. mr. woodall: i ask for a vote on agreeing to the speaker's approval of the journal. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on agreeing to the speaker's approval of the journal. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it.
9:02 am
mr. woodall: mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia. mr. woodall: i object to the vote on the grounds that a quorum is not present and make a point of order a quorum is not present. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this question will be postponed. the pledge of allegiance will be led by the gentleman from ashington, mr. heck. mr. heck: i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the speaker pro tempore: the chair will entertain up to five requests for one-minute speeches on each side of the aisle. the gentleman from georgia. mr. collin: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. collins: thank you, mr. speaker. today we come and we find this one truism, obamacare showed that to take a government -- federal government takeover of health care is not in the best interest of addressing our health care system. today we're going to be taking a closer look at the top three
9:03 am
obamacare failures -- premiums have gone up not down. instead of lowering costs, health care prices have went up. people have less choice than ever before. before we examine these, let's remember how we got here because there seems to be some selective amnesia on this floor. after months of backroom deals, middle of the night, last-minute votes without giving the american people enough time to read the bill, that's not what's going to happen this time. republicans are going to do what we said we would do. listen to the american people. we're going to do this right. with input from our neighbors, the folks we go
9:04 am
communities. we're not going to pull the rug out from under anyone. we have listened to our constituents what we're hearing over and over again. the same three failures. premiums have gone up not down. instead of lowering costs the health care prices went up and people have less choice than ever before which in many cases is no choice at all. this is a failure, mr. speaker. and it's time to end. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from maryland seek recognition? without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. hoyer: i absolutely disagree with the previous speaker. he's wrong. he's wrong on the facts. he's wrong on the fact that the affordable care act was on the table longer than any bill since i have been in congress which was 36 years. to read, to review, to analyze, and make a decision. every american will be adversely affected if we repeal the affordable care act. millions of americans with disabilities depend on access to quality, affordable health care and deserve to have their voices heard in the debate over our health care system. in fact, only one in five americans when polled think we put to repeal the affordable care act without having a replacement. there is no replacement. 64 times they voted to repeal
9:05 am
the affordable care act. they still do not have a replacement. according to the c.d.c., 53 million americans live with a form of disability. for the affordable care act to be repeal would be permitted to discriminate against them, denying coverage for increasing premiums based on their disabilities. repeal would also allow insurance companies, again, to impose annual and lifetime limits on coverage for every american. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. hoyer: do not repeal the affordable care act. and show us the beef. show us the alternative. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from indiana seek recognition? without objection. >> thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, obamacare is built on broken promises. president obama promised that through his health care law premiums would go down.
9:06 am
instead they have gone up. in most states premiums have increased by double digits. in some states like oklahoma, premiums are going up by as much as 76%. i'm from indiana, and indiana in 2017 based upon current enrollments, the average rate will increase by 18.7%. overall, the premiums in indiana have gone up by 70% since the affordable care act was first enacted. not only are americans paying more for coverage, the cost vs. gone up as well. out of pocket cost, deductibles. for 2017, four carriers will be selling in the indiana marketplace, and i have one county in my district where no carriers provide for the local hospital. mr. messer: today we'll start a process of keeping our promises, mr. speaker. we promised the american people that we would repeal and replace this failed health care law. and only in washington would
9:07 am
keeping your promise somehow be controversial. thank you, mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from washington seek recognition? without objection. >> thank you, mr. speaker. i have a constituent named marty. marty was studying to earn her bachelor's degree in nursing when she was diagnosed with rectal cancer. not good. without medical insurance as we all know that is a certain death sentence. no other way about it. it wasn't for marty because frankly just less than a year before she had finally found affordable health care insurance for herself through the washington state health exchange. every family, every person in this chamber has been affected by it. mr. heck: cancer has a way of ripping bodies apart, families
9:08 am
apart, and communities apart, but it didn't rip marty apart. through her strength and courage and health insurance, she persevered. she has conviction that god used her community of friends and her family and the affordable care act to help her for treatment and into recovery. not only could marty share that story with me back in 2015, but, oh, by the way, she graduated couple laudy in nursing this last december. i'm sharing her remarkable story with you and it could be replicated millions of times to urge you to setaside and rise above partisan politics and not repeal the lifesaving affordable care act. i ask you to do this not just for the sake of marty, but because there, my friends, but for the grace of god go each and every one of us. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from west virginia seek
9:09 am
recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. >> thank you, mr. speaker. the a.c.a., obamacare, whatever you want to characterize it as, is broken and we're here to fix it. we want to empower patients. we want to bring health care back to the american people. let me talk about access to insurance coverage. people have less access today to insurance coverage than actually any time in the past. instead of competition to bring down and draw down insurance costs, 1/3 of the counties in the united states have only one choice of an insurance carrier, which is no choice at all. no competition. insurance carriers are pulling out of the exchanges en masse, crithing unsustainable costs because of obamacare. mr. jenkins: the american people are demanding change. enough is enough.
9:10 am
they want relief. they want competition. they want lower costs. they want better quality. and we are here to fix obamacare and honor the promise to the american people to empower the patients of america to give them the choice, the quality, and the cost control they so desperately need and that obamacare rob them of. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from arizona seek recognition? >> unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. grijalva: i rise today to tell my constituents that i will not be attending the inauguration of donald trump as our next president. my absence is not motivated by disrespect for the office or motivated by disrespect for the government that we have in this great democracy. but as an individual act, yes, of defiance, at the disrespect shown to millions and millions of americans by this incoming administration and by the
9:11 am
actions we're taking in this congress. the majority of voters did not reject trump they deserve respect. but 20 million plus americans threatened by the repeal of the affordable care act without a replacement deserve respect. the millions who did not vote because they blame both parties deserve respect. i am the -- i will be at home in arizona meeting with seniors, the immigrant community, folks that care about the environment and climate change, health care providers, and march in tucson will folks who will demand respect. i will be talking about the need to defend and protect the future for all americans. rather than participate in the inauguration, i will be participating in my district and reaffirming and renewing this democracy and the people that are part of it. yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? without objection.
9:12 am
>> mr. speaker, today i will reintroduce legislation entitled save the christians from genocide act. mr. rohrabacher: the bill declares that christians in iraq, syria, pakistan, iran, and libya as targets of genocide and thus gives them a priority for immigrant and refugee visas. importantly this bill does not circumvent or change current vetting processes, but rather simply ensures that these targets of genocide are placed at the front of the line for immigration and refugee visa processing. the save the christians from genocide act was submitted but not brought to the floor for a vote in the last congress. during that time, thousands of christians have been killed and often turned into helpless and hopeless refugees on the run
9:13 am
from radical islamic terrorism. the save the christians from genocide act will give middle east christians a safe haven. christians are being slaughtered as we speak today, christians are being slaughtered in the middle east. we must save them if we can. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from california seek recognition? >> unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mrs. napolitano: listen, americans. one of obama's critical successes was increase mental health services. because of a.c.a. over 48 million are now covered by mental health laws. insurance companies can no longer deny coverage for patients needing mental health services, but we do need tougher enforcement on this and also on the insurance rate increases.
9:14 am
the a.c.a. expanded medicaid, the single largest payer of behavioral health services to any population, that has allowed over 1.6 million americans to gain access to substance abuse treatment. last month we signed into law reforms to mental health and substance abuse grants and services. repealing a.c.a. would harm advances. a.c.a. should be strengthened, not repealed, so more americans have access to lifesaving mental health services. we must move mental health forward. not back. support a.c.a. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from hawaii seek recognition? without objection. ms. gabbard: the american people have felt directly the cost of our nation's interventionist wars, the costs borne by our nation's sons and daughters who served, and by communities and people in every part of this country. we have spent trillions of dollars on regime change wars in the middle east while
9:15 am
communities like mine in hawaii face a severe lack of afford and housing, aging infrastructure, the need to invest in education, health care, and so much more. our limited resources should go toward rebuilding our communities here at home not fueling more counterproductive regime change wars abroad. i have introduced the stop arming terrorist act, legislation that would stop our government from using taxpayer dollars to directly or indirectly support groups who are allied with in supporting terrorist groups like isis and al qaeda in their war to overthrow the syrian government. the fact that our resources are being used to strengthen the very terrorist groups we should be focused on defeating should alarm every american. i urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan legislation and stop this madness. i yield back. .
9:16 am
the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia finally seek recognition? mr. woodall: mr. speaker, having finished bipartisan activities for the day, by the direction of the committee on rules, i call up house resolution 48 and ask for its immediate consideration. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the resolution. the clerk: house resolution 48, resolved, that at any time after adoption of this resolution the speaker may, pursuant to clause 2-b of rule 18, declare the house resolved into the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for consideration of the concurrent resolution senate concurrent resolution 3,
9:17 am
setting forth the congressional budget for the united states government for fiscal year 2017 and setting forth the appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2018 through 2026. the first reading of the concurrent resolution shall be dispensed with. all points of order against consideration of the concurrent resolution are waived. general debate shall not exceed two hours, with 90 minutes of general debate confined to the congressional budget equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on the budget and 30 minutes of general debate on the subject of economic goals and policies equally divided and controlled by representative tiberi of ohio and representative carolyn maloney of new york or their respective designees. after general debate the concurrent resolution shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. the concurrent resolution shall be considered as read. no amendment shall be in order except the amendment printed in the report of the committee on rules accompanying this resolution.
9:18 am
such amendment may be offered only by the member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, and shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent. all points of order against such amendment are waived. after the conclusion of consideration of the concurrent resolution for amendment, the committee shall rise and report the concurrent resolution to the house with such amendment as may have been adopted. the previous question shall be considered as ordered on the concurrent resolution and on any amendment thereto to adoption without intervening motion. the concurrent resolution shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question of its adoption. section 2, upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider in the house the bill senate 84, to provide for an exception to a limitation against appointment of persons as secretary of defense within seven years of relief from active duty as a regular commissioned officer of the armed forces. all points of order against consideration of the bill are
9:19 am
waived. the bill shall be considered as read. all points of order against provisions in the bill are waived. the previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and on any amendment thereto to final passage without intervening motion except, one, 90 minutes of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on armed services, and two, one motion to ommit. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia is recognized for one hour. mr. woodall: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, during consideration of this resolution all time is yielded or the purpose of debate only. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. woodall: i'd like to yield to my good friend from massachusetts the customary 30 minutes. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. woodall: mr. speaker, i also ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. woodall: mr. speaker, house resolution 48 provides for consideration of s.con.res. 3,
9:20 am
the f.y. 2017 budget resolution, as well as consideration of a bill to move forward on the process of confirming our civilian secretary of defense, former general mattis. mr. speaker, the rule is a structured rule today to move expeditiously on both of these measures. in the time we've got to spend together, mr. speaker, you know i am a fan of the festival democracy that can be the rules committee process, particularly the appropriations process, but there are times where moving expeditiously is required, and today is one of those days. you're not going to see a rule like this come very often because we're considering the f.y. 2017 budget resolution today. historically, as you know in this chamber, when we get ready to consider budget resolutions, mr. speaker, we're considering every single one that every single member of congress that
9:21 am
would have an opportunity to write. that process takes place every spring to meet the statutory deadline of passing budgets by april. this is not that budget today, mr. speaker. this is a budget, as you know, to move us forward on a reconciliation process to finish up the f.y. 2017 budget process, and rather than considering all the amendments that one might have to offer, we've made in order just one. it's the democratic substitute. it's offered by my good friend, the ranking member on the budget committee, mr. yarmuth, and it's absolutely worthy of the membership's consideration. ut it is not going to be a vote-a-rama. it will be one substitute from the ranking member. when it comes to consideration of the measure to waive a statutory prohibition on naming a civilian secretary of
9:22 am
defense, mr. speaker, who has been out of the military for less than seven years, we're also offering that under a closed rule today. no amendments are going to be made in order. you may not know, mr. speaker, but that is the only statutory change that has passed the united states senate in 2017. when we talk about having to move expeditiously, when we talk about whether or not we're going to have an open process or a closed process, understand that while this body has passed dozens of statutory changes in just these first nine days of legislative activity, the senate has passed but one. and this is in anticipation of an inauguration of a president next -- well, on january 20, this is in anticipation of trying to filling out a cabinet. this is in anticipation of trying to make sure that civilian leadership is in place
9:23 am
on day one to lead and to serve the men and women of the united states military. this is not the time to have vote-a-rama. this is trying to move. i look forward to get back to leading the senate, not following the senate. i look forward to getting back to getting to the business. today i urge my colleagues to support this rule so we can move expeditiously on pass twog priorities, passing that f.y. 2017 budget resolution, and ensuring the speedy confirmation of civilian leader of the department of defense. with that i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: thank you, mr. speaker. and i want to thank the gentleman from georgia, mr. woodall, for yielding me the customary 30 minutes. i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks
9:24 am
and i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, i rise in very strong opposition to this restricted rule and i rise in strong opposition to the underlying legislation. because of republican infighting, congress was unable to do one of its most basic jobs last year, passing a full budget for fiscal year 2017. so now house republicans have brought this budget bill to the floor, but we all know that this is just a vehicle for them to repeal the affordable care act and take away health care from millions and millions of americans. you know, for nearly seven years, my republican friends have railed against the affordable care act. their well-funded allies have spent billions of dollars distorting the a.c.a. and lying to the american people about what it actually does. and for nearly seven years, there has not been a single comprehensive health care bill brought to the floor by republicans as a replacement for the affordable care act. not one. we have voted over 60 times to
9:25 am
repeal the a.c.a. on the house floor. i would be the first to admit that a.c.a. is not perfect, but rather than work together to tweak it or to make it better, all we get from them are repeal bills, repeal bills, repeal bills. and let me again point out, not once, not once was there a replacement bill offered. not only do republicans not have a plan to replace the affordable care act and protect access to health care for more than 20 million americans as they gained coverage, they can't even agree on a timeline for when they'll pass their replacement. president-elect trump says repeal and replace will be done on the same day and he wants it to happen now. representative steve scalise said republicans would replace the a.c.a. over the course of the next few months. senator john thune said it could take two or three years for the replacement to be implemented. representative chris collins said republicans have six months to do it.
9:26 am
and senator mitch mcconnell refused to give a timeline, just saying it would happen. while republicans fight with each other over timelines, i think it's appropriate to ask, if they did have a replacement, what would that replacement be? well, president-elect trump has the answer. when asked what we should replace obamacare with he said, and i quote, something terrific, end quote. when pressed for further details and more specificity he said, and i quote, something that people will really, really, really, really like, end quote. mr. speaker, you can't make this stuff up. it would be laughable if it weren't so tragic. it's tragic because what republicans are trying to do is take health care protections away from millions and millions of families. now, no one in this congress has to worry about health care if the affordable care act is repealed, and the donald trumps of the world certainly don't have to worry about health care if the affordable care act is repealed. if someone in their family gets really sick, they'll just sell
9:27 am
some stocks or close down another american factory or not pay their workers, as our president-elect has been known to do on many, many occasions. but for millions of americans, it will be a different story. repealing the a.c.a. would mean over 30 million americans would lose coverage, including nearly four million children, more than 52 million individuals with pre-existing conditions could have coverage rescinded or see their premiums dramatically increased. millions of young adults will be unable to stay on their parents' plans until they're 26. over 14 million individuals enrolled in medicaid under the expansion would lose coverage, and nearly 140 million individuals with private insurance would lose access to reventative services without co-pays and co-pays and deductibles. and millions of seniors would see their prescription drug prices increase because it would reopen the so-called doughnut hole that the a.c.a. has begun to close. republicans want to slash medicaid, a health care program
9:28 am
that does a lot of good stuff and enables mothers to work their way out of poverty by providing affordable coverage for their children. as someone who represents massachusetts, this is especially personal because medicaid is one of the best tools we have in the fight against opioid addiction, providing real care for the addiction and the underlying conditions that drive opioid epidemic in our communities. repealing medicaid expansion under the a.c.a. would rip coverage away from an estimated 1.6 million newly insured individuals with substance use disorders. that's what makes -- that's what's at stake, and that's what my republican colleagues are so happy and so giddy and so excited to do. it is sad. it is pathetic. but they're moving forward anyway with no replacement in sight, and i suppose they can roll out their oldies but goodies like health savings accounts or other health care prescription, take two tax breaks and call me in the
9:29 am
morning, but that doesn't do it. mr. speaker, we have a complicated health care system, no doubt. i wish it were simpler. that's why i've always favored a single payer system and that's why i favored a public option. but the problem with our system before obamacare was that it left all the decisions up to the insurance companies. you remember the days when insurance companies could charge women more for health insurance because they said, being a woman was a pre-existing condition? you can't do that anymore. why? not because of my republican friends. they can't do it anymore because we passed the a.c.a. and this budget bill would also give republicans a green light to defund planned parenthood. to my colleagues who are so anxious to defund planned parenthood just to satisfy their right-wing base, let me ask, have you ever visited a planned parenthood clinic? because if you had, you would understand why what you're doing is so wrong. the fact is that planned parenthood plays a critical role in protecting and
9:30 am
providing access to critical health services for both women and men. one in five women has relied on a planned parenthood health center for care in her lifetime, and planned parenthood serves 2.7 million patients each year. and one of the most important statistics that my republican friends like to ignore is that more than 90% of what planned parenthood does nationally is preventative care, including cervical cancer screenings, breast cancer screenings and family planning, not abortion services. add to this fact that planned parenthood clinics are often one of the few affordable health care options available for many women. nearly 80% of women using planned parenthood clinics have incomes at or below 150% of poverty, and it's easy to see why a majority of americans don't think federal funding should be eliminated. in one recent poll, 63% of voters, including 72% of independents, do not agree with my republican friends that federal funding for planned parenthood should be eliminated.
9:31 am
. . we heard very little about what the consequences would be. one of the biggest myths perpetrated by republicans is the idea that our nation's community health centers, which i love and adore and respect, would suddenly pick up the slack if planned parenthood is defunded. for the millions of low-income women who depend on the plant parent hooth clinics, it would mean the loss of contraceptive services counseling, and breast and cancer screenings. with the many communities served by planned parenthood clinics, recklessly cutting funding would wipe out access to vital health care services to people who need them the most. let me make something very clear. zero federal dollars go towards the abortion services provided by planned parenthood. zeerrow. the vast majority of funding that planned parenthood receives comes in the form of medicaid reimbursements for preventive care that they
9:32 am
provide. mr. speaker, it is a cool thing to do to take away people's health care. and i will say to my republican colleagues that they need to know. that we have to fight you every step of the way on this. there is some battles on behalf of the american people that are worth having and worth fighting. and this is one of them. making sure that their health care protections remain intact. i came to congress to help people, not make their lives more miserable. and finally, mr. speaker, let me comment briefly on the other piece of legislation in this rule, s. 84. general james mattis has been praised by both democrats and republicans, but there is a very real concern about civilian control oferte military, the language of the underlying legislation and the duties and responsibilities of the house of representatives. general mattis has a distinguished career. but we're talking about changing the law here. approving the waiver for him to serve in the cabinet so soon after his military service is a
9:33 am
serious decision. it is so serious that such a waiver has happened only once before in the entire history of the united states. we should debate this, and instead the trump transition team canceled general mattis' testimony before the house armed services committee and now expects us to vote for him willy-nilly without us being able to ask him any questions. congress is supposed to be a check on the executive branch, but if the house is denied the opportunity to meet with and question the military officer who was nominated as our next defense secretary, how can we fulfill our duty and blindly just vote for him? i would also say to my republican friends, this is an early warning sign of the dishe -- disregard this new administration has for the house of representatives. general mattis was willing to testify, but the trump team said no. they said no to the house of representatives. caving in on this issue will only mean continued disregard
9:34 am
for the people's house in the future. i think that that's regrettable. with that i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from georgia. at oodall: mr. speaker, this time it's my great pleasure to yield four minutes to the gentleman who probably knows more about the health and human services appropriations bill that anyone else in this congress, the cardinal from that committee, 114th congress, the gentleman from oklahoma, mr. cole. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from oklahoma is recognized for four minutes. mr. cole:thank you, mr. speaker. i thank the gentleman for his kind words and for yielding. mr. speaker, i rise in support of the rule and the underlying legislation. as has been made clear, we're actually talking about two different pieces of legislation here today. the waiver for secretary designate james mattis, is quite frankly, a no-brainer. the senate voted 81-17 in favor of that waiver. i would suspect there will be similar bipartisan support here. my friend's correct, of course, it's a serious matter whenever
9:35 am
we grant exceptions to the law, but general mattis is just uniformly and universally respected across the lines for his distinguished work in defense of this country. so i hope we move ahead on that. the budget resolution that comes before us is another matter and there will be great deal of contention. thankfully the resolution itself is not, as my good friend from georgia pointed out, and should not be seen as a traditional budgetary item. it's frankly a projection of what will happen if we do absolutely nothing over the next decade and leave the current set of policies in place. it's a sobering document to read in that regard because it shows rising deficits every single year for a decade beginning at over $580 billion and then moving well north of $1 trillion. and frankly in my view it's that we ought to look
9:36 am
at and some to the realization we're going to need to do entitlement reform in the next decade. something people on both sides of the aisle seem to want that ignore. but absent that, we will have extraordinary budget deficits and they'll be large enough to undercut and undermine our economy. but the budget resolution's also a vehicle, a tool, to begin to repeal the affordable care act. this is necessary for really one simple reason. the affordable care act or obamacare as it's popularly known is a failing system. it's unpopular. it's never been popular. never hit 50% of popularity. frankly, in my view it's cost our friends, the majority in the house, then cost them their majority in the senate. may vell have cost them the presidency of the united states. the american people have spoken emphatically we don't like this product. it's collapsing financially right now. this is not a system that's in operation that's really doing well. let me just talk about my own state. we have about 197,000 people
9:37 am
that have gotten insurance under obamacare. this year they will have exactly one choice as to what company they want to choose to provide them. and their rates will go up by 69%. nationally i think the average is over 25%. but clearly this is not a system that is working very well. politically the easy thing to do would be what our friends want us to do. let's just leave it alone. it will fall under its own weight. it will be very clear who is responsible for that collapse. the current administration and my friends on the other side. but that also would be the irresponsible thing to do, and that would be in itself an abdication of leadership and ultimately unfair to the american people. instead, we're going to repeal the system and begin to replace it with something that will work better. my friend's point is a fair one, there is no a single plan out there. but there are plenty of plans. i know i co-sponsor a couple
9:38 am
myself. and i think we'll be able to work through this relatively easily. there have been a lot of discussion and a lot of diagnosis about what the failures of obamacare are, but there has been very little in the way of actual legislative remedy. we have a unique opportunity to do that. frankly, i'm proud of our speaker, i'm proud of our conference that they are going to seize that and begin this process, because i don't think there's anything more important facing it. i would urge the passage of the rule and then the passage, obviously, of the under lying legislation -- underlying legislation, particularly the budget resolution that allows us to begin the necessary work in repealing and replacing obamacare. and obviously the waiver that would allow us to have a distinguished secretary of defense, general mattis. with that, mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: i want to point out a couple things. first of all according to the brookings institute, without the a.c.a., insurance premiums would be 44% higher.
9:39 am
and the other fact i point out for my colleagues is that health care costs are growing at the slowest rate in the last 50 years. families are spending over $3,500 a year less than they would have without the -- because of the a.c.a. i would say to my colleagues, yeah, we want to do better. but let's work to address some of the shortcomings of the a.c.a. rather than repeal it and put in danger all these health care protections people have. i now yield 1 1/2 minutes to the the gentlewoman from new jersey, mrs. watson coleman. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman new jersey is recognized for 1 1/2 minutes. mrs. watson coleman: we're in week two of this 115th congress, as promised my colleagues and i are here to stand up for this good nation. unfortunately, house republicans cannot say the same. last night they decided the nursing home coverage for millions of seniors, comprehensive health care for young children, and the benefits earned after a lifetime of hard work are not worth fighting for. that's exactly why the
9:40 am
gentleman from wisconsin offered an amendment to ensure that the budget resolution being considered today could not be used to cut benefits from three critically important programs -- medicaid, medicare, and social security. in fact, president-elect promised many times he would neither cut social security benefits for seniors, nor would he support cuts to medicaid and medicare. but the rule under consideration this morning fails to allow a debate or vote on this amendment which faces the earned benefits and the financial future of american people at risk. p who are my republican colleagues looking out for? certainly not their constituents. it is clear we're faced with a republican-controlled congress that is ensuring the divided and self-serving rhetoric that echoed throughout this campaign season rings true. this is not outlined in our constitution. this is not the democracy we're sworn to protect. with that i urge my colleagues to reject this rule and i yield
9:41 am
back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia. mr. woodall: mr. speaker, i yield myself 30 seconds to thank my colleague for her admonition to reject divisive and self-serving rhetoric. that is something we should take to heart. with that i would like to yield four minutes to a member of the rules committee, a new member of the appropriations committee, the gentleman from washington, mr. newhouse. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from washington is recognized for four minutes. mr. newhouse: thank you. i'd like to thank my good friend from georgia for yielding me this time to speak on these important issues. mr. speaker, the opportunity to speak on this important rule provides consideration for the fiscal year 2017 budget resolution, and s. 84, which provides a legal exception for general mattis to serve as secretary of defense. certainly are important issues. as a member of the house rules committee, i'm very proud to
9:42 am
support this rule as well as both of the underlying mesh shires. -- measures. s. 84 provides a one-time exemption on behalf of an individual who is uniquely qualified to serve during a very challenging period in our nation's history. at a time when u.s. national security and military readiness is of paramount importance for both americans and our allies around the world. this legislation does not permanently change the law, nor does it diminish the founding principle of civilian control of our military. in fact, this rule allows for consideration of legislation providing for a one-time exemption that does exactly the opposite. it reinforces the doctrine of civilian control of our military. by setting into motion this unique procedure, the people's elected representatives are taking the seriousness of this circumstance to heart, to
9:43 am
debate and carefully weigh granting an historic exception only provided on one other occasion in our history. the man at the center of this matter demonstrates the extraordinary nature of the situation we currently face. general james n. mattis has served our nation with unparalleled distinction over the past 40-plus years. born in pullman, washington, he grew number my congressional district. the fourth district of the state of washington. he attended what was then columbia high school, now richland high, and graduated from central washington university. it was growing up along the banks of the columbia river in richland where general mattis' parents instilled in him a deep passion for reading which then developed into a renowned lifelong devotion to intellectualism, military and world history, and the study of war.
9:44 am
general mattis has been in command at increasing levels throughout his career within the united states marine corps, where he began as a student enrolled in rotc and rose to the rank of general. served as commander of the united states central command, responsible for american military operations in the middle east, northeast africa, and central asia. few individuals command the respect and admiration general mattis has earned amongst the troops, the national security experts, and military and civic leaders. this rule allows for the consideration of legislation to provide the united states senate its proper role of advice and consent regarding the nomination of general mattis to serve as our next secretary of defense. i urge my colleagues to support this rule so the senate can rightfully provide its constitutional guidance, which i'm confident will overwhelming
9:45 am
support this distinguished leader and public servant from the great state of washington. mr. speaker, i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, i'm going to urge my colleagues to vote no on the previous question. if we defeat the previous question, i will offer an amendment to the rule to allow for the consideration of representative pocan's amendment which i'm a proud co-sponsor of, to create a pound of order against any legislation that would cut pen fits under social security, medicare -- benefits under sths, medicare, medicaid, or attempts to privatize social security. all are things my republican friends have advocated for in previous budgets. mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to insert the text of the amendment of the -- in the record along with extraneous material immediately prior to the vote on the previous question and to discuss our proposal, i yield three minutes to the distinguished gentleman from wisconsin, mr. pocan. the speaker pro tempore: without objection.
9:46 am
the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. pocan: thank you, mr. speaker. i thank the gentleman from massachusetts for yielding. i urge my colleagues to vote no and defeat the previous question so that we can bring up my amendment which would block the pouse g.o.p. majority from -- the house g.o.p. majority from cutting medicare, medicaid and social security. president-elect donald trump has promised many times throughout his campaign that he would not cut social security benefits for seniors, nor would he support cuts to medicare or medicaid benefits. in fact, he at least 15 times said he would not make cuts to medicare or social security. he even tweeted it so we know he really, really meant it. so if it's important to the democrats and it's important to the president-elect, it's important to the american people, let's make sure it's absolutely certain that no one has to worry about a cut in their social security and medicare benefits, not a single cut to anyone. if we could do that that would be the single biggest success of the 115th congress. if you support the idea that
9:47 am
you will not cut social security and medicare, that you will protect the promise to our constituents, then support this amendment. but if you're not sure yet or if you might be willing to cut social security and medicare or if you're actually considering cutting these programs, then you should oppose this amendment. again, our amendment would block any legislation before the house or senate which cuts guaranteed earned benefits under social security, medicare or medicaid programs, that would increase the retirement age for these benefits or that would privatize social security. nationally over 64 million people receive benefits from social security. i want to read a couple comments from constituents from the state of wisconsin, the home state of speaker paul ryan and myself. robin said, please, do everything in your power to oppose speaker ryan's legislation to privatize security -- social security and
9:48 am
medicare. these are benefits for a lifetime of working as dairy farmers. carol from madison said, i am a retired navy veteran and cancer survivor. my grandfather, a world war ii and korean world vet, is living in a home on medicare and medicaid. what is going to happen to him if republicans are successful and drastically alter these programs? democrats believe we need to protect our senior citizens and the most vulnerable in our society. democrats believe we need to strengthen the middle class through the preser vation of social security -- preservation of social security and medicare. do republicans share our belief? let's make it crystal clear. do you want to protect social security and medicare or do you want to cut these earned benefits? you can decide that with this vote. i urge my colleagues to vote no and defeat the previous question so we can bring up the c.p.c. and find out who truly supports medicare and social security in this house and i
9:49 am
yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia. mr. woodall: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. woodall: i reluctantly recognize we are apparently not going to have an end to divisive self-serving rhetoric and it's a long year ahead of us but what my friend, mr. pocan is suggesting, mr. speaker, is that we ensure the failure of social security going forward. the only guaranteed benefit in social security is that it's guaranteed to fail. this is not my word. these are the words of the actuaries that are protecting social security. the nonpartisan actuaries that govern social security say there is not enough money today to pay the benefits that folks are expecting, and the law of the land, as it exists today, requires that when that day comes benefits get cut dramatically.
9:50 am
75% -- only 75% of realization of benefits is what the law requires that this -- that befall our senior citizens. mr. speaker, if we pass the amendment that's suggested by my friend, we would be prohibited from considering any solutions to that problem. means testing, which my colleagues have advocated for years, off the table under that scenario. mr. speaker, to suggest that anyone on in side of the aisle wants to undermine the commitment that this country has made to our seniors is ludicrous, is ludicrous, but to suggest that i go to the 22-year-old whose polling today suggests he or she believes they're more likely to see a u.f.o. in their lifetime than a social security check in their lifetime, to suggest going to that 22-year-old and thinking that maybe their retirement age
9:51 am
would be a year or two higher than their great grandparents since they are now living decades longer, i remind my colleagues, we came together in a bipartisan way to raise the retirement age from 65 to 67 in 1983. not because one of us hated seniors and one of us loved seniors, but because we all believed in our commitment to seniors. mr. speaker, don't let the record reflect anything other than that this budget resolution provides the framework to begin this discussion, to begin the discussion of what comes next. there's not a single line of authorizing language in this budget resolution. any suggestion that the law will change tomorrow because of this budget resolution is false. the law will be the same tomorrow as it was yesterday. the difference is will have begun a path, we will have created a framework, we will have provided the tools to have
9:52 am
a discussion about how to solve very real problems in this country. with that, mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: yeah, mr. speaker, let me respond to my colleague, the gentleman from georgia, by saying i don't know what he's talking about. the pocan amendment is pretty clear. it says that there will be a point of order against any legislation that would cut the benefits under social security, medicare or medicaid or attempts to privatize social security. now, i know my republican friends want to privatize social security because they tried that in the past, and i know they want to privatize medicare and turn it into a voucher system because that's what their budgets continually do. i mean, that's what we're trying to prevent. if you want to privatize social security, if you want to privatize medicare, turn it into a voucher system, then, you know, stand with them. but if you want to protect these programs and the vast majority of americans, democrats, republicans, and independents want to protect the integrity of social security, medicare, medicaid, then oppose this budget.
9:53 am
and by the way, this budget basically is the green light to go ahead and destroy the protections that people value in this country. mr. speaker, at this time i'd like to yield two minutes to the gentlewoman from new york, the distinguished ranking member of the rules committee, ms. slaughter. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from new york is recognized for two minutes. ms. slaughter: thank you, mr. speaker. i thank my colleague for yielding me the time. mr. speaker, it is unconscionable to me that the majority is prioritizing a repeal of the affordable care act as its top priority for the . 5th congress as the nation's infrastructure crumble and and this budget puts the wheels in motion, as my colleague has said, the repeal for the health care law without anything to take its place. this budget would also increase our nation's debt by $9.5 trillion over the next 10
9:54 am
years. and apparently, the party that has tried to claim the mantle of balanced budgets for years doesn't really care about fiscal responsibility. it's the first step, also, toward defunding planned parenthood, which serves 2.5 million patients, men and women, across the country every year. that's 2.5 million and provides preventative care like birth control and cancer screenings. and it seems to me for the majority of my adult life i have been trying to defend planned parenthood. and the excuse given is that the community health centers can pick up the slack is so enormously wrong. in the -- the community health centers are scared to death that they will be asked to pick up the slack of 2.5 million patients and that is absolutely a cover for something that doesn't make any sense at all. i was shocked to read a study
9:55 am
over the summer that found that the rate of pregnancy-related deaths in the state of texas since they did away with planned parenthood seems to have doubled since 2010. making texas one of the most dangerous places in the world to have a baby. what was happening in texas during this time? state legislature was not only planned s to parenthood. low-income women, that was the only place for them to get their care. and they did not expand their medicaid program which would have given low-income women desperately needed access -- one? have an additional mr. mcgovern: i yield her an additional minute. ms. slaughter: one of the things we talked about last night in rules is lots of states where the premium where they thought had gone reasonably high were also states that did not expand the medicaid and set up the
9:56 am
exchanges which were intended to cut cost. while the causes of maternal deaths are complex, certainly leaving women without access to medical care will not do anything to decrease that mortality rate. so today my republican friends want to i flict the same harm on -- inflict the same harm on pregnant women across the country by taking away the medicaid expansion and taking away money to clinics like planned parenthood. i cannot believe in this day and age and in this century it's even contemplated. i know the american people are paying attention because every day in my office we get between 20 and 30 calls and have for the last two or three weeks begging us not to repeal the a.c.a. so this agenda has the potential to devastate millions of people from coast to coast instead of solving problems. the majority is on the verge of creating new ones for families all across the country. i yield back the balance of my
9:57 am
time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia. mr. woodall: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. woodall: my friend from massachusetts said in his opening statement he didn't come to congress to hurt people. he came to help people. i want to stipulate that's 100% true. there is no one in this chamber who i believe has a bigger heart for men and women than the gentleman from massachusetts. which is why i know that he does not support what i see happening to my constituency. he says people are paying less for their health care today. i dispute those numbers writ large but i know it's true in my district because the free health care clinic has doubled since the passage of obamacare. folks who once had access to small plans that they chose for their families, those plans were outlawed. now they have high deductible plans that are worthless to them, and so they seek care at the free clinic. i know that ripping the plan out from under those men and women in my district was not
9:58 am
the gentleman's intention when he passed the affordable care act, but it's absolutely the result. i know that when the gentleman set up those exchanges that all americans were supposed to be able to go to buy their health care plan, he did not intend for those plans to get cancelled year after year after year after year because they were unsustainible but we all know constituents in our districts who did what the government told them to do, lost the plan their employer used to provide, went to the exchange to buy a plan and one year later that plan was cancelled. so they went through the process again. they picked out another plan. they went through the exchange and paid their money, and one year later that plan was cancelled. and again and again. we all know those constituents, so to suggest that the only reason someone would come to the floor today is to solve a nonexistent problem is ridiculous. we all know that there are problems. what is ridiculous are folks
9:59 am
who would come and defend the status quo. the status quo is indefensible, mr. speaker. when we get together we can do amazing things. the vast experiences of the members in this chamber, mr. speaker, bringing those to the table, leads to better solutions. we've spent six years stuck in the status quo, and this bill represents an opportunity to turn the page on that status quo and it's an opportunity that i know every single member has constituents in their district who will welcome it. with that i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, i just want to help the gentleman understand the benefits of the a.c.a. in his home state of georgia. 468,000 individuals in the state have -- who have gained coverage since the a.c.a. was implemented, now they could lose it if he gets his way. 478,000 individuals in the state were able to purchase
10:00 am
high-quality coverage, marketplace coverage, now stand to lose their coverage if the gentleman gets his way. 427,000 individuals in the state have received financial assistance to purchase marketplace coverage. that was in 201. they're at risk of losing -- that was in 2016. they're at risk of losing that. 74,000 young adults are able to stay on their parents' health insurance until they're 26 because the a.c.a. that's all in georgia. so i would hope the gentleman would understand what's happening in his own state before he votes to repeal it. mr. speaker, i yield one minute to the gentleman from connecticut, mr. courtney. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from connecticut is recognized for one minute. . mr. courtney: last night speaker ryan told people obamacare is trumbling. i would like to share just a tiny fraction of the emails my office has received in the last few days to demonstrate that the opposite is true. peter, 63-year-old farmer from
10:01 am
ellington, connecticut, a.c.a. has allowed me and my wife access to quality health care. if this law is repealed either i sell off my land and livestock or go without insurance. becky, a 41-year-old small business owner and single mom. before a.c.a. hadn't seen a doctor in four years. now she and her kids have a plan for $315 a month. 53-year-old freelance designer past two years he and his wife have been covered by an affordable plan. the same message from michelle, a registered nurse with health issues. sue, her husband has cancer. barbara, 59-year-old registered nurse with chronic condition. all are watching this destructive process with an -- with outrage. for these people the thing that is crumbling is their confidence in congress to do the right thing and stop this rush to repeal. as george said, i have never been so worried for my country. vote no on repeal. vote no on the rule. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia. mr. speaker, i
10:02 am
yield myself such time as i may consume. i was not in congress at the time the affordable care act passed, but i remember it watching from home. we talk about this as if it was some sort of thoughtfully crafted piece of legislation that folks are so tremendously proud of. i happen to have the numbers here, mr. speaker. it was h.r. 4872 that moved through the house. that was the authorizing part. we had three votes in the u.s. house of representatives on that bill. we had a motion to recommit as it was not actually a health care bill to begin with. and bill on final passage. and went it to the united states senate where they worked their will on it. they had 43 votes on it, amendments offered, ideas, and changes. it came back to the house where we changed it not at all. one straight partisan vote on
10:03 am
the affordable care act. not one idea from the u.s. house of representatives. not one change from the u.s. house of representatives. not one alteration of any kind because as you will recall, mr. speaker, they had a filibuster-proof majority in the united states senate. so democrats could work their will any way they wanted to. when they lost that filibuster-proof majority, they only had 59 votes out of 100 instead of 6 o 0, they end -- 60. they ended debate, they ended discussion, they ended collaboration and jammed what they had past midnight on christmas eve right on through the u.s. house of representatives. i can't imagine who defends that as the proper outcome of the legislative process. but we have a chance to change that, mr. speaker. i'm glad that my friend from connecticut has some constituents that have benefited. i have some constituents that have benefited. but i have constituents who are being failed and i know my
10:04 am
friend from connecticut does, too. i'm glad that my friends on the other side of the aisle are talking about all of their success stories, but i want my friends to join me and grapple with all of the failures. i will not deny the way the conversation about health care has changed since the passage of the affordable care act. folks talking about pre-existing conditions, lifetime caps, folks talking about keeping people on their policies. a young kid until they are 26. i just don't understand why my colleagues would deny that folks who used to have care now don't. folks who used to have affordable plans now don't. folks who used to be able to take care of their employees through their small business plans now can't. this is undisputed. and we have an opportunity to do better. i hope my colleagues will join me in doing that. with that, mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. mr. mcgovern: the gentleman from georgia is entitled to his
10:05 am
own opinions but not his own facts. the facts with regard to the process in which the affordable care act was developed i think it's worth repeating here. in the house of representatives, we held nearly 100 hours of hearings. 83 hours of committee markups. the house heard from 1le 1 -- 118 wbses, both democrats and republicans. 239 amendments were considered. 121 were adopted. the bill was available for 72 hours before members were asked to vote on the floor. in the senate the senate finance committee held more than 53 hearings, eight days marking up the legislation. the longest markup in the 22 years of the committee. the senate health committee held 47 bipartisan hearings, round tables, and walkthroughs on the health care reform bill. so to say that this was not a thoughtful process is just wrong. compare that to the way this budget bill is being brought to the floor. no committee consideration. no deliberation. it's just given to us. most of the committees aren't
10:06 am
even organized yet in the house of representatives. there is a contrast there and i stand with the way we approach the affordable care act as opposed to the way the republicans have approached this budget deal. at this time, mr. speaker, i yield one minute to the gentleman from florida, mr. soto. the speaker pro tempore: how much time? mr. mcgovern: one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. here's my one-minute breakdown on why i oppose repealing obamacare without replacement. first, this law protects all americans with pre-existing conditions. second, it keeps all young adults on their parents' insurance until age 26. and third, it protects all americans from bankruptcy if they get sick by removing lifetime caps. before the act, millions of americans were simply kicked off their insurance when these problems arose. we democrats support keeping these protections for all
10:07 am
americans. anti-republicans want to repeal them. -- and the republicans want to repeal them. we support in improving the act and republicans want to eliminate t while many have stoked fear and spread false information for political game, it's clear that repeal without replacement equals disaster. it will eliminate these protection force all americans, create chaos for working families, and send our country into another recession. it's clear we need to improve than repeal than repeal it. it's time to do the right thing for all floridian, for all americans. with that i yield back my ty. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia. mr. woodall: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume to share with my friend from massachusetts that one is not entitled to their own facts. but one is also not entitled to share just half the story and leave it as if it's the entire story. everything the gentleman from massachusetts said was true. until u.s. house abdicated any responsibility whatsoever and
10:08 am
passed exactly what the senate did with no amendment whatsoever. all of the work product the gentleman talked about, all of the work the gentleman talked about went for naught in this u.s. house of representatives. to deny that this is not the bill that folks wanted to have crafted is to deny reality. to deny that this is not the bill that folks wanted to have crafted is to deny the nine different times the republican house and senate sent to the president repeals of obamacare. things that were so broken even the president couldn't live with it, and he signed those repeals into law. mr. speaker, i'm not trying to denigrate any of the motives my friends on the other side of the aisle. i just can't understand for the life of me why they don't want to try to do better. that pride of authorship, that arrogance, it has a real impact on the men and women that i serve. i'm asking my friends to partner with me to help me fix
10:09 am
it, but if they won't partner with me, i'm going to move forward and fix it anyway. with that i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, we have been willing to work with our republican friends to try to improve the affordable care act for nearly seven years. they have been unwilling to work with us in a bipartisan way. instead they want to repeal, repeal, repeal. i don't know what their motivation is. maybe it's because they don't like president obama. judging from. so rhetoric that we have heard on this house floor over these years, think some of the members over there hate the president of the united states. and this is all driven by this personal an mossity. let me just -- animosity. let me say to the gentleman, it may have started out with a different bill number, the facts remain. hundreds of hours of hearings on the act, hundreds of amendments considered in committee. the process of using a different bill number is very common in both chambers.
10:10 am
the house republicans have done it several times in the past three years. regardless of the bill number, the work that went into forming this legislation was one of the most open processes in the history of the congress. and it has resulted in providing protections in health care for millions and millions of people in this country, all of that is at risk with this budget resolution. mr. speaker, i'm happy to yield one minute to the gentleman from oregon, mr. blumenauer. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from oregon is recognized for one minute. mr. blumenauer: i agree with my friend from massachusetts. i was in the middle of hundreds of hours of discussion and debate in committee, in the floor. it's amazing to think of all the time and energy that went into it. was it a perfect bill? absolutely not. it would have been much better if the legislative process hadn't collapsed in the senate and forced reconciliation as the vehicle. but the offer to somehow become party and work together to solve the problems ring hollow.
10:11 am
i have been on the ways and means committee for the last six years when republicans were in charge with constant efforts to repeal obamacare, but refuse toe work with us to -- to work with us to fine-tune the legislation where we could move forward and build on this foundation and not be in a situation where we're going to unsettle health care markets, leave people doubting about where they are, and having no clue about what comes forward. there is a reason after six years the republicans do not have an alternative to offer now, it's because they are wildly counter particular torrey promises cannot be met. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. blumenauer: rejection of the rule and rejection of this effort to cut the most important health care reform in the last 50 years. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia. mr. woodall: mr. speaker, i'd like to yield three minutes to my friend from illinois, mr. shimkus. the speaker pro tempore: the
10:12 am
gentleman from illinois is recognized for three minutes. mr. shimkus: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. shimkus: thank you, mr. speaker. i'm on the energy and commerce committee, the health care bill came through, and we can debate how many hearings, how many questions and all that. the public has rendered judgment on this health care law. in 2010 republicans took back control of the house over two issues. obamacare and cap and trade. and then our base was saying, repeal obamacare. all the way back to 2010. 2014, the republicans took over the senate. our base is saying, you got the house, you got the senate, repeal obamacare. it's harmful. it's destructive. i'll tell you why in a minute. so why should anybody not expect us in 2016 when the
10:13 am
public's rendered judgment again in a national election that we have to repeal obamacare? so when i talk to my constituents and people talk to me, this is going to happen. and we know there's going to be a replacement. look, two different ideologies how to provide care. we believe in markets, you believe in centralized control. we believe in people choosing the best plan for them on the private markets, and those who need help and assistance to get in those markets, we'll help them. but to have a federal government say you only have one of four choices, my constituents pay for health care that they can't use. because they can't pay the deductibles. so they are forced to buy something they can't use. so this is timely. i'm glad we're moving birble. -- expeditiously. we look forward to the year ahefment thank you, mr. chairman. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts.
10:14 am
mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, we believe health care protections ought to be enshrined into law and not left up to insurance companies. i yield one minute to the gentlewoman from connecticut, ms. delauro. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from connecticut is recognized for one minute. ms. delauro: i rise in strong opposition to the rule. it sets into motion the repool of the affordable care act. this quote repeal only bill takes money intended to fund health care for middle class families and it hands it to the wealthy families and to big health corporations in the form of tax cuts the public does not know this. according to the center for budget and policy priorities, this bill would give the 400 highest income families in the united states an average tax cut of $7 million a year. it would rob millions of families of the money they need for their insurance. it hands it over to the
10:15 am
wealthy, including nearly $250 billion over 10 years in tax cuts for health insurance companies and drug manufacturers. where are the majority's values? we should be providing more americans with health insurance not fewer. we should be creating jobs, not eliminating them. this bill is a disgrace. it is a betrayal of the working families of this nation. i yield back the balance of my ime. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia. mr. woodall: mr. speaker, i yield myself to say absolutely not one word of that is true. this bill does nothing to change the law at all in any way, shape or form. it's not true. this bill provides a process pour debating the law and i certainly hope we can pass it so we can have that debate.
10:16 am
i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. woodall: i reserve the remainder of my time. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, i yield one minute to the gentleman from california, mr. khanna. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. khanna: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise in strong opposition to this bill which will set forth the repeal of obamacare. but i also am concerned that the bill doesn't have a basic amendment which would allow for the importation of drugs from canada. senator sanders courageously yesterday went on -- wednesday night went on the floor and introduced an amendment to allow for the importation of drugs from canada that the overwhelming number of republicans and democrats support. it was appalling that 13 senate democrats voted against the sanders amendment, and they did so because the pharmaceutical industry is a cancer on this
10:17 am
body. the pharmaceutical companies' contributions are a cancer. we need to allow for the importation of drugs. we need that to be an amendment to this bill, and we need to take it up as a body. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia. mr. woodall: mr. speaker, i'd advise my friend from massachusetts i don't have any further speakers and would be happy to close when he's prepared. mr. mcgovern: before i do i'd like to yield 30 seconds to the gentlelady from connecticut, ms. delauro. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from connecticut is recognized for 30 seconds. ms. delauro: report by families u.s.a. issued said repeal of the affordable care act equals a huge tax cut for the wealthy. what people don't know and the public doesn't know at the moment this will hand over to wealthy and major corporations, they're going to get new tax breaks worth nearly $600 million. more than half trillion dollars over 10 years.
10:18 am
$348.5 billion over 10 years in tax cuts with people with incomes over specified thresholds. $250,000 for families. there's $274.4 billion over 10 years going to health insurance, drug manufacturers and other large corporations. that is what repeal of the affordable care act does. and my colleagues needs to face up to that and the public needs to know it. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. the gentleman from in -- mr. mcgovern: does the gentleman have other speakers? mr. woodall: we don't have other speakers. we will be happy to close when the gentleman does. mr. mcgovern: i'd like to ask unanimous consent to insert in the record letter from the american medical association, a letter from 120 interfaith groups a letter from the consumer union, a letter from the massachusetts health and hospital association, a letter from a number of labor organizations in my home state of massachusetts, a letter from
10:19 am
umass memorial community link, which is a provider of comprehensive care in my district, all opposed to undoing the affordable care act. i'd like to ask unanimous consent to put that in the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, i yield myself the remaining time. i ask my colleagues to vote no on the previous question. just to remind you, that will allow us to vote on an amendment by mr. pocan which would create a point of order against any legislation that would cut the benefits under social security, medicare and medicaid or attempts to privatize social security. so if you want to protect those programs and if you're against privatizing social security, then vote against the previous question so we can bring this up. finally, mr. speaker, let me just say that this is a sad day because what we are doing here by voting for this budget is setting in motion a process to deny millions of people health care protections. i can't imagine why anybody would want to do that. is the affordable care act perfect? no. and we're the first to admit
10:20 am
it. we want to work in a bipartisan way to strengthen it, to make it better, to make it more, you know, less onerous on businesses but my colleagues don't want to do that. they're determined just to vote for an outright repeal. and that is going to hurt countless people in this country, people who have now benefited from no pre-existing conditions, people who have benefited from allowing their kids to stay on their insurance until they're 26. senior citizens who have been fitted from closing the doughnut hole. i can go on and on and on. all that is about to be eliminated. we're told there will be a replacement someday, some how. for six years, over six years you have been talking about repealing the affordable care act and replacing it, and you haven't brought one bill to the floor. not one. now, we believe that health care ought to be a right. i know you don't. we believe that health care protections ought to be in law. you believe they ought to be up
10:21 am
to the insurance companies. but this is a lousy thing to do, and as i said in my opening statement, we are going to fight you on this. this is a fight worth having. protecting people's health care is something that we all should be dedicated to, and we're going to fight you on this. i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. members are reminded to address their remarks to the chair. the gentleman from georgia. mr. woodall: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. woodall: i'm fond of telling folks back home, mr. speaker, when they tell me they know exactly what's going to happen over the next two years. i don't think they're telling me the truth because i confess to you, i have absolutely no idea what's coming over these next two years. i think these next two years will be unlike any we have seen in the history of self-governance in this land, and candidly, i'm excited about that because the status quo isn't working for the 700,000 people that i represent. i don't know what's going to
10:22 am
happen over these next two years, but i believe that for the first time we are going to grapple with some really, really, really hard problems that folks on both sides of the aisle have been ignoring for too long. mr. speaker, i don't question the commitment of my friends on the other side of the aisle to the american people. i question the legislation that they use to deliver it. you heard my friend from oklahoma talk about premiums going up 67% for his constituents. that's indefensible. it's not ok. we can do better, and with the passage of this budget resolution, we will have the tools to do that. i say again, the law will be the same tomorrow as it is today, but we will have the tools to grapple with these problems. eight million americans were so
10:23 am
failed by the affordable care act that they paid a tax penalty instead of accessing care. that's not ok. i don't believe a single member on the other side of the aisle decided they just wanted to tax young people instead of provide young people with quality care. this bill, this budget will give us the opportunity to have the tools to fix that problem. billions of dollars, mr. speaker, have gone into state-based co-ops that have failed, gone bankrupt, terminated all of their plans which not only ripped health care out from under the american people, mr. speaker, but threw billions of dollars away in administrative costs at the same time. that's not ok. that's indefensible and we can do better. passing this budget resolution
10:24 am
will give us those tools. mr. speaker, i made a commitment in the rules committee last night to do everything i could to stop poisoning the well of public discourse. i reuped for the rules committee and i realize that will be a tough promise to fulfill. we have difficult work to do, and we're passionate about the mr. y of that work, but, speaker, we all know the status quo has failed. we all know that we have the opportunity to deliver, and we all know that a vote of yes on this budget resolution will give us more tools to deliver that success than we have today. we need to do this. we need to celebrate doing this. i ask my colleagues to support the rule, support the two
10:25 am
underlying measures that it will bring to the floor, and with that, mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time and i move the previous question. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is on ordering the previous question on the resolution. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: on that i ask for the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. faverfiver -- those favoring a vote by the yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. pursuant to clause 9 of rule 20, the chair will reduce to five minutes the minimum time for any electronic vote on question of adoption of the resolution. this is a 15-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]
10:26 am
10:27 am
10:28 am
10:29 am
10:30 am
10:31 am
10:32 am
10:33 am
10:34 am
10:35 am
10:36 am
10:37 am
10:38 am
10:39 am
10:40 am
10:41 am
10:42 am
10:43 am
10:44 am
10:45 am
10:46 am
10:47 am
the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 233. he nays are 170 --
10:48 am
the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 234. the nays are 179. a majority voting in the affirmative, the previous question is ordered. the question is on adoption of the resolution. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: on that i ask for a recorded vote. the speaker pro tempore: a recorded vote is requested. those favoring a recorded vote will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this will be a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]
10:49 am
10:50 am
10:51 am
10:52 am
10:53 am
10:54 am
the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 235. the nays are 188. a majority voting in the affirmative, the resolution is adopted. without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table.
10:55 am
10:56 am
the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the house will be in order. members in the rear of the chamber, please take conversations off the floor. he house will be in order. he house will be in order. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from tennessee seek
10:57 am
recognition? mrs. black: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials to s.con.res. 3. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. pursuant to house resolution 48 and rule 18, the chair declares the house in the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for the consideration of senate concurrent resolution 3. the chair appoints the gentleman from illinois, mr. hultgren, to preside over the ommittee of the whole. the chair: the house is in the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for the consideration of senate concurrent resolution 3 which the clerk will report by title. the clerk: concurrent solution setting forth the
10:58 am
congressional budget for the united states government for fiscal year 2017 and setting forth the appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2018 through 2026. the chair: general debate shall not exceed 90 minutes equally controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on budget. and the gentleman from ohio, mr.ty beery and the gentlewoman from new york, mrs. maloney or their designees. the gentlewoman from tennessee, mrs. black, and the gentleman from kentucky, mr. yarmuth, will control 45 minutes for debate on the congressional budget. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from tennessee. ms. blark: mr. speaker, i reserve after debate has concluded -- mrs. black: mr. speaker, i reserve after debate
10:59 am
has concluded. the chair: without objection, so ordered. the committee will be in order. members will remove your conversation from the house floor. the committee will be in order. the committee will be in order. members, please remove your conversation from the house floor. the gentlewoman from tennessee is recognized. mrs. black: mr. speaker, i rise today to speak on behalf of americans everywhere who are hurting because of obamacare. they're calling out for relief from this disastrous law and republicans are here today to begin delivering on our promise to provide relief. now we hear plenty of claims from the other side of the aisle during this debate, but let's be clear, obamacare has failed and it's only going to get worse. patients have seen skyrocketing
11:00 am
deductibles and access to their doctors preferred have fewer options while others had their plans cancelled outright. in 2015 roughly eight million americans paid the obamacare penalty and more than 12 million claimed exemption from the penalty. that's 20 million americans. what does that say about this law that 20 million americans want nothing to do with it? many preferring to pay a penalty rather than to be subjected to its higher costs and fewer choices. . if you ask me it's strong evidence the american people are tired of paying more and getting less. of course the destruction of the obamacare has caused ex tends beyond the discouraging individuals to purchase coverage. mr. speaker, the house is not in or. the chair: the committee will be in order. the committee will be in order.

18 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on