tv Budget Committee Votes 19-17 to Report GOP Health Care Bill to House CSPAN March 16, 2017 10:02am-1:20pm EDT
warranty details there. thank you for being here and thank you for watching. thanks again. [applause] >> thank you, nel. we have built-in a 15 minute networking break. >> will take you live to the longworth house office building on capitol hill. the house budget committee this morning to mark up the republican health care plan that was passed out of committee last week after overnight sessions from the energy and commerce committee's, ways and means committee last week. the session with the house budget committee expected to run throughout the afternoon. cq writes republican for democrats on the committee agreed each side can offer a set offers seven motions on the market. these will not be amendments. instead they would direct budget chairman diane black of tennessee when the legislation goes to the rules committee.
that's the next step here. the rules committee next and for action in the coming week or two. live coverage all day here on c-span2. >> today we need to report the recommendations made to the budget committee pursuant to reconciliation instructions set forth in title to ask congress three. the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2017. under the congressional budget act of 1974, the budge committee has the role of combining the reconciliation submissions of the committee on ways and means and reporting the bill to the house without any substantive revision. it was concluded that any final motion. under the agreement average bid the ranking member, today's markup will be conducted as
follows. as per our usual practice, members in search of written statements into the record. i will hold it open until the end of the day for that purpose. phil then proceed with the motion to the house the recommendations submitted to us pursuant to the reconciliation instruction. after voting, to report the american health care act of 2017, will then entertain any wrath of motion. on this motions there will be a minute of debates evenly divided. the proponent and opponent will be recognized with one minute for each proponent to close. i now recognize the gentleman from indiana, mr. rickey that.
>> sensor scheduled a floor vote later today come i ask unanimo consent that with a house rule 16, chairman beatrice to declare recess at any time. >> without objection, so ordered. we will now move to the opening statements and without objection i have to submit for the record. good morning and welcome to the market at the house budget committee. we are here today to act on the american health care act. this bill seeks to address one of the most fundamental policy challenges we face, how to reduce the cost of health care and give all americans access to quality care. this is something house republicans have talked about for years and the opportunity is finally here to fulfill the promise he made to the american people. under the leadership of speaker
ryan, the body began to formalize an approach for patient centered health care under our better way plan. the better way plan outlined our philosophy for health care reform. we need to take control of health care decisions away from the government and give it back to the patients and doctors. we need to reduce costs and ensure that everyone has access to quality care and we need to reform and allows states to modernize government programs like medicaid to strengthen them and ensure they provide for people they were intended to help. that's what our bill does. the american health care act provides portable monthly tax credits not tied to a job for washington mandated program. this provides more flexibility to americans who don't currently have insurance through their employer and lower costs by increasing competition and choice.
bill also provides more insurance options by allowing individuals and families to buy the insurance plan that they need and want at a price that they can afford. it's not the job of the government to tell americans exactly what type of insurance coverage they should purchase. our plan allows for people to choose the plan that best meets their needs and increases the amount of money placed in their health care savings account to ensure the individuals and families can spend and save health care dollars the way they want. the american health care act is also a once in a generation entitlement reform. medicaid spending is growing out of control and its reforms and modernize his medicaid for the 21st century. reforming the program in giving states greater flexibility to make the program fit the needs of their citizens will protect the program and make sure it's available for the population is intended to serve.
after all, the issues that face california are very different from the issues that face the state of tennessee. most importantly, this bill protects our most vulnerable citizens. in total, the bill reduces the deficit by 337 billion over 10 years and lowers taxes for 883 billion over the same time. for individuals and small business owners. at the same time, primus will decrease by 2026. this legislation is a conservative vision for free-market, patient centered health care. it dismantles the obamacare mandated taxes. it puts health care decisions back in the hands of patients and doctors were they belong and as a nurse i know how important this is. this is the conservative health care vision that we been talking about for years. it is our response to the outcry from their own constituents to
rescue them from obamacare. to my republican colleagues would does today, i encourage you to cut out the discussion. stay in this effort and help us with their proposal advancing to the committee's been pushing for conservative reform. members who desire to see the bill improved have every right to make, care and replace it with the patient centered health care. we were promised premiums that would decrease by $2500 the employer market by $4300. we were promised health care would go down and deductibles have skyrocketed. we were promised they could keep our doctrine health insuran plan and instead, millions of americans have lost their insurance and the doctors they like.
in short, the affordable care act with either affordable nor did it provide the quality of care american people deserve. we also have to remember that problems with obamacare are not merely numbers on the page. i've been a nurse for 45 years and i saw the impact in the 1990s of a government run single-payer system that we have in tennessee as a pilot program called 10 care. i saw costs rising quality of care fall. it is that actually inspired me to get involved in public service in the first place. when i saw the same broken or principles applied here at the national level with obamacare, i felt held to bring my voice inmates. tear to congress. i get called every single day in my office both here in washington that the district level, saying please help us come to rescue us. premiums in my state have
increased over 60%. there are parts of tennessee that don't have a single insurance provider in the market place while other places in my state, people have an insurance card, but they can't take care. jenny, a resident of my district reached out to say that her family's insurance premiums rose from $340 a month to $860 a month. i quote her saying to us health insurance shouldn't cost the same as the mortgage payment. george from westmoreland, in my district reached out to my office to say this will be the first year since he was very young that he would not be able to afford health insurance. before obamacare, he was paid $458 a month for health insurance. the series premium is a whopping $1160 a month. he said, and i quote, please do something, anything to work and
help the situation. during a recent town hall for a t over 8000 constituents on my phone at the same time from a district, more than 70% surveyed said obamacare had a negative impact or no positive impact on their life. these are real stories and real people who have been negatively impacted by obamacare. these stories are the reason i'm drawn to public service in the first place. we had a chance to truly fix problems during our health care system and i cannot sit idly by and let the opportunity pass. he made a promise to the american people to repeal this law and replace it with an impatience under, health care reforms where can have the insurance they want at a price they can afford. this bill is a good first. but it is we are doing. my good friend and former chairman of this committee,
dr. tom price, secretary of hhs has together processed of rolling back burdensome regulations and federal requirement entry by obamacare. the process will continue to secretary price worked to dismantle the regime putting government between patients and their doctors in driving up the cost of coverage. at the same time, i look forward to future legislation which addresses issues that cann be clud iis bil these pieces of legistion will provide a more robust and competitive marketplace to bring down health care costs for all americans. already my colleagues on the judiciary committee and the education workforce committee are working on separate pieces of legislation that will foster greater competition among health care insurers that will implement significant medical malpractice reform and will allow small businesses to band together and association health plans to negotiate lower costs for employees.
this is our three-pronged approach to delivering patient centered health care reform. the american health care act is a strong first step in this process. it secures key conservative victories to lower costs and put patients back in charge of their health care decision while ushering in the most significant reforms to entitlement programs in decades. in accordance with the 1974 congressional budget act, the budget committee plays an important role by the legislation from the energy and commerce and ways and means committee into a single bill in the fiscal year 2017 budget resolution. i want to thank the committee to help draft the legislation further offer and i look forward to today's markup. i strongly support this bill and i urge all of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to work with us to pass this important piece of legislation and bring relief to the american people.
thank you. with that, the yield to the ranking member. >> thank you, chairman black. i have to admit i was on a loss on how to begin the opening statement. i don't know it all seems to be 724 million people of this are health care coverage of a passive though. the cbo estimates are unreliable. my colleagues can claim whatever they want. this book has hundreds of billions of dollars from medicaid. that is indisputable. the cut grow larger to 25% of the entire medicaid program in 2026 and they get deeper a deeper every year after you can't cut medicaid that severely without dramatically cutting coverage and care. that's the clear about who would lose coverage and care. parents struggling medicaid buy-in poverty level wages. children and people who are too disabled to work. let's be honest. this is not a health care bill.
an ideological document in a market that doesn't exist. is painfully real. $600 billion in tax cuts to corporations on the wealthy paid for the worst possible way by jeopardizing the health and well-being of american families. it takes life-saving health care from those in need to give tax cuts to the rich with consequences all across the country. this is robin hood in reverse, but far worse. speaker ryan wants to talk about giving people the freedom and choice to decide whether to have health insurance or not. given insurance companies the freedom and choice to cherry pick young healthy enrollees and fill them -- that would work if young people had the freedom to choose whether to get cancer or not you are a serious accident or not which they obviously don't.
that doesn't stop speaker ryan from pretending this bill will create some magical health care free market elsewhere in the world. the fantasy land where people don't get sick and apparently don't grow old either so they don't have to worry about being priced out of the market as this bill does. that is nonsense and why cbo does the project more people. cbo says exactly the opposite. the number of people without insurance will nearly double. i think that's all you need to know if you are wondering why this is being rushed to the floor. remember, it was introduced last monday, mark up in the energy and commerce ways and means committee two days later. it's now before our committee will be on the house floor as soon as republican leadership can get it there. there have been no congressional hearings on this legislation. not a single hearing on legislation that impacts a health care of nearly every american family.
if i were them i wouldn't want to talk about this bill either. i certainly wouldn't want to defend it. the american people deserve to know what's in it, so let's run through the facts. 14 million americans will lose coverage next year. the number rises to 24 million people by 2026 benefactor rises to 21,002,020. consider that in three years the entire games under the affordable care act will be wiped out. these people will live in fear that they are always one serious illness or car accident away from bankruptcy. the nonpartisan congressional budget office estimates premiums in the individual market will jump to 15% to 20% in 2018 and 2019. at the end of the decade, premiums will be 10% less than current law. the main reason for the drop is largely because older people will be priced out of the market
which i hope no one would want to brag about. for example, a 64-year-old making less than $27,000 a year rreny pa$170 a year for coverage under the affordable care act. under this bill, the same premiums skyrocket to more than $14,000 a year so he or she would spend more than half of their income to get coverage. that's not progress. that's a crisis. but it gets worse. for pretty much everyone in the market, other costs including deductibles will be higher and will be significantly higher. this bill increases financial risk for consumers. it eliminates the requirement that insurance provides policies of certain actuarial values which means companies can sell plans that offer much less financial protection. plus it takes $100 billion
shortening the life of the program by three years. it does fall back, cutting coverage for millions of americans, increasing costs and millions more to give a $50,000 tax cut every year and $144 billion tax cut to insurance companies into the pharmaceutical industry. in a special tax cut to subsidize health insurance executives who often make $10 million or more a year. the remaable document when you think about what was promised to the american people. president trump repeatedly said the replacement bill would preserve existing coverage that everybody would have insurance and would be less expensive and much better. it's going to be great. he also pledged medicare and medicaid would not be cut.
none of that is in this bill. the exact opposite of one of those promises to me to the american people is what's in this bill. secretary of health and human services tommy price stated that more people will be covered that are covered right now and nobody will be worse off financially. not true. speaker ryan promised i would be left out the coal and no one would be worse off. wrong. republican conference chairwoman kathy mcmorris rogers pledged because obamacare will lose the coverage. wrong again. you won't find any promises kept in this bill. promises made by the president of the united states and the secretary of health and human services, speaker of the house and other members of house congressional leadership. let's remember, this bill is their first step to republican strategy, strategy they publicly stated is to take away the affordable care act guarantees
that services like maternity care, mental alth and substance abuse ll be covered. ultimately this bill, future legislation on efforts to end consumer protections to regulation will put insurance companies back in charge, allowing them to once again decide. i strongly oppose this bill and i am not alone in this opposition. as posed by america's hospitals, doctors, nurses, aarp, american cancer society, american diabetes association, both sides of the aisle and more and more republican colleagues in the house. this bill is not what the american people want. they have made that clear by showing up by the thousands of town halls across the country. we can improve the affordable care act. they vote no on this bill and
ensure every family has access to quality affordable health care the american people deserve no less. thank you and i yield back. >> thank you. following our practice, i ask unanimous consent humberside until the end of the day to submit their statements to the record. without objections so ordered. we will now proceed with reading -- we wiceed with reporting the american health care act of 2017 the house and i want to remind the members of the motions will, the conclusion of the vote on this procedure. i ask unanimous consent that the first reading be dispensed with. the clerk will not report the title of the measure to be reported. >> adult to provide reconciliation title ii of concurrent resolution on a budget for fiscal year 2017.
>> section 310 of the budget act of the 1974 requires the budget committee to report the reconciliation bill to the house without any substantive revisions, motions to amend the bill will not be entertained. i now recognize the gentleman from indiana, mr. rokita to order the reconciliation of reported. >> thank you, mr. chairman. at reported the american health care act of 2017 the recommendation the bill to pass. >> the question is on ordering a health care bill of 2017 to be reported favorably to the house. all those in favor signify by saying i ago. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. a record of the vote is requested. the clerk will call the roll.
[roll call] >> are there any members who have not voted or wish to change their vote? >> however had been recorded? >> you have not been recorded. >> i vote aye. any other members who want to change that though? the gentleman is not recorded. the gentleman does now. >> mr. sanford, no. >> any other members would like to change their vote or who have not voted russian ark if not, the clerk shall report. >> on that though come the ayes or night team and those are 17. >> the ayes habit. the american health care act of 2017 as ordered reported to the house of representatives with a favorable recommendation. i note for the record that a quorum is present. >> madam chairman, has the
requisite number of days to file. >> so ordered. i now recognize the gentleman from indiana, mr. rokita. >> madam chairman, i ask chairman, i ask, mr. reported to staff the author has to make it a necessary technical and conforming collections prior to filing the bill such as inserting the short title of the bill in the motion should be reconsidered. on the table and chair of the authorized to motions to go to conference pursuant to house rule 22 on the bill just reported for any companion measure from the senate. >> without objections so ordered. with the bill reported to the house, i ask unanimous consent that the city follows long-standing custom of this committee and entertain the notion that in the order specified to the agreed-upon list and made to the available numbers. debate on this motions will be limited to 20 minutes each, equally divided with one minute to start the proponent to close. the proponent and opponent of
the motion will each be allowed to control their time. without objections so ordered. i would like to also remind members that these motions do not actually amend the reported bill and are not binding on the rules committee. that completes the consideration of the american health care act of 2017. the [inaudible conversations] ..
the motion to support an amendment to the bill that would prevent any provision of the american healthcare act from being implemented until the secretary of hhs certifies that it fills the promise made by president trump to the american people. the president has promised that there will be no increase in the number of the individuals without health insurance. that healthcare would become more affordable, with lower out-of-pocket costs and that the quality of health insurance will be better. just this january, the president said quote, were going to have insurance for everybody. that quote, people can expect to have great healthcare and he is against the notion that quote, if you can't pay for it, you don't get it. we are hard-pressed to see how any of this bills provision could fill the president promises and the american people deserve to know specifically how our healthcare system improves by taking insurance away from 24 million americans. stripping $880 billion out of medicaid over 10 years and
shoveling 600 billion in tax cuts to wealthy americans. it's nearly twice as much as the paltry $361 billion this bill provides an rhenium and cost-sharing assistance to those americans who need it. the president has and i quote, we are going to have insurance for everybody. much less expensive and much better. this motion requests a clear explanation as to why, under this bill, the typical 64-year-old with an income of $26,500 would be forced to now pay 14,600 and in premiums by 2026, almost 13,000 more than what he or she pays now under obamacare. how is that quote, less expensive and much better?
>> i think the distinguished gentleman from pennsylvania for yielding for his leadership. donald trump made three promises to the american people about healthcare. one, everyone will be covered. two, it will be more affordable. three, it will be much better. from care breaks all three promises. it's a fraud. it's a scam. it's a charade. it's a hollywood style production that will destroy all care in america. trump care will directly lead to millions of americansusing their insurance . according to the cbo within the next year, 14 million additional americans will be without healthcare coverage. in 10 years, 24 million hard-working americans lose health insurance altogether. the president assured americans that affordability will not be the reason they
lose their coverage. yet trump care takes dead aim at the poor, the sick and the elderly. cbo estimates 14 million people will lose access to medicaid within the next 10 years. sn same estimate projected that before age 50, 64 with incomes of over 49,000 for a family of four would be more than twice as likely to be uninsured under this bill. trump care also guaranteed a decrease in out-of-pocket costs. yet again, trump care falls short. the gop plan will force families into purchasing land with even hired adoptable's and higher cost-sharing and they will bear more of the cost of premiums, a 64-year-old with an income of 26,500 will pay almost $13,000 more for their premiums in the individual market within the next 10
years. rising costs will hit older americans, low income families and those living in rural areas, especially far. trump care will automatically reduce the quality of health insurance . almost $900 billion cut in medicaid for new benefits and limit care for low income families.it will be especially harmful for seniors, nursing homes and children with disabilities who rely on medicaid. this bill will also allow insurers to offer plans that will provide significantly less protection for enrollees to greater financial risk and we know the cbo expects that they will take it vantage of this design plan that mostly appeals to people who do not expect to need much medical care.
the scripture in matthew 25 versus 35 says, when i was hungry, you gave me something. when i was thirsty, you gave me something to drink. i was a stranger and you took me in. i was naked and you clothed me. i was sick and you look after me. trumpcare fails on all stores. >> thank you, i yield one minute to the ranking member of our committee, the gentleman from kentucky, mister yarborough. >> iq mister boyle for yielding, just to collaborate a little bit on what's already been said, the key elements of this proposal, i think one of the most damaging ones is guarantees th the coverage that we provided in theaffordable care . as i stated in my opening
statement, this bill would allow insurance companies coverage without mental health coverage, despite the fact that we have an enormous opiate and drug addiction problem in this country. it would allow insurance companies to reduce actuarial values so a very small portion of the actual out-of-pocket cost of care would be the responsibility of the insured and not the insurance company, and in many other ways increasing the exposure of the people covered under these policies. again, another broken promise the president made including i might mention before yielding back that he did make promises that he would not cut legislature and it cuts $1 billion out of the medicare trust fund. the financial viability ofthe program runs about three years, i feel that . >> we now yield to the
gentleman from the commonwealth of massachusetts. >> i want to thank my colleague for the time. on sunday, health and human services secretary price said that the house republican plan will leave no one worse off financially. no one worse off. tell that to the 14 million americans who won't have access to healthcare next tell that to the 16 million seniors and individuals with disabilities will pay drastically more for healthcare next year because of this bill. tell that to the 3 million veterans who will lose their healthcare coverage because this bill. thank you for your service but you will be a lot.
don't take it from me, let's read the cbo report. cbo report says that cautionary payments including deductibles would be higher than those anticipated under the current law. once again, the american people are being sold alternative facts by trump and his administration. thank you and i yield back. >> thank you and i yield one minute to mister connor. >> thank you mister doyle and thank you for your leadership. as you pointed out, the president promised three things. better benefits, lower costs. but how was he going to do it? in 2000 he wrote and i quote, the canadian style payments made from medical care made for a single agency helping canadians live longer and healthier than americans. the present thought that a single-payer was the only way to live up to these promises but senator sanders for
medicare, he is serious about living up to any of the commitments he has made an ideal back mytime . >> thank you, and i yield one minute to mister jackson-lee. >> both he and mister jeffries for this very important amendment, let me take note of the speakers promise to ensure that we know we are not speaking about healthcare bill for the reasons that this amendment is so important. speaker ryan indicated that if health care reform, we are talking about trillions in the end in this program. we're talking about hundreds of billions year throughout the country. this is so much bigger by orders of magnitude then welfare reform. speaking about what you all are doingto medicaid . this is a bust medicaid bill. it's not a health care bill. and it ignores completely the response that has been given
to the american people by the president, that everyone will have insurance. people covered under the law can expect to have great healthcare, that is not the case and so i asked opposition to the bill in support of the amendment, ideal back. >> thank you, ideal back. >> gentleman yield back , now i'd like to recognize mike clint off for the opponent for 10 minutes. >> thank you madam chairman. mister boyle and jeffries raise good points regarding the structure of the tax credit in particular, and i'm going to address that in my amendment number 11. the absurdity of the motion is clearly illustrated with the cbo's own report. they devoted an entire section of the fort and titled uncertainty surrounding the estimates in which they admit they can't
predict how federal agencies and states, employers, individuals and doctors and hospital would react to the law and they can't predict how the law would be implemented. i distinctly remember president obama certifying to the nation that we would be an average $2500 drop in the cost of our healthcare premiums. instead we see the $4300 increase in those premiums. obamacare averaged 25 percent last year which is still bigger increases expected. i remember president obama certifying to the nation that if you like your plan, you can keep your plan. millions of americans lost their plans and were forced onto the obamacare exchanges. one third of our counties have no choice at all , there's only one provider and another third there are only two providers. i distinctly remember the cbo certifying that 21 million
individuals would enroll in obamacare exchanges by 2016. in fact, only 11 million did. i don't believe that president obama deliberately lied about this. as yogi berra famously said, protections are difficult , especially when they involve the future. the fact is, complex governmental interventions in the marketplace quake create a wide variety. we are now dealing with the wreckage in the intervention. we know for a fact that it hasn't worked well for a majority of americans. their premiums are skyrocketing, is denied and the choices that free market offers. as providers fleeing from the market and its set taxpayer costs spiraling. nobody contends this bill is a perfect plan, it's not a complete plan. i wish we were sending comprehensive reform that completely repeals obamacare and completely replaces it
with a healthy, vibrant and consumer driven market. instead, this bill consists of those measures that are permitted under the reconciliation process and relies on administrative rules and follow-up legislation to complete the work. that's another of the limitations of the cbo's claim to clairvoyance, one piece of the form, the bill that's now before us without attempting to assess the other measures that make it fully work. once all the measures are implemented, consumers will have the widest range of choices to select a plan that best meets their needs in a competitive environment where a large number of health plans are tripping over each other to offer consumers the best service at the lowest price with the taxes to assist families in keeping his plans within their financial reach.is that a certainty? of course not. more likely though, to control costs and expand choices and ensure accessibility and promote innovation and excellence in the current system, that i believe is a reasonable expectation. now you would like to yield 1 and a half minutes to mister lewis of minnesota . >> there's a lot of talk
today about broken promises but the biggest broken promise has been the affordable care act. mister mcclintock talks about premiums nationwide, i can talk to you about what happened in minnesota. governor mark dayton said the affordable care act is n longer affdable. commerceommissi: an emergency situation with premiums rising 50 to 67 percent in the last two years. when blue cross blue shield dropped out of the minnesota market, 100,000 minnesotans were left with our plan even though president obama promised you could keep your doctor. this is a debacle and everybody in minnesota knows it's a. exchanges are shot, state of minnesota passive $310 million emergency legislation just the exchange people buying on marginally a float.that's the process we are in. not to address this the best of our ability would be a derelict of not only our
promises, i yield back to mister mcclintock. >> i yield a minute and half to mister faso of new york. >> i think my colleague and i appreciate the motion that is made by my colleague on the other side. unfortunately, this motion is really just an aspirational proposal. it doesn't offer any specifics, it just says what they would like and what they would wish. it is typical washington. that's the problem. people around the country are sick and tired of what washington does. this is often nothing. we have a situation around us where yes, many people across the country are happy with the aca but just as many if not more are seeing extraordinary increases in premiums, extraordinary increases in deductibles. they can no longer afford it.
they may have insurance in some instances but they don't have it that's affordable that they can buy, that they can use for themselves and their families. unfortunately, the motion our colleagues are offering on the other side is just washington speak. it doesn't make a suggestion as to what the chair is supposed to do if you went to the rules committee. if you want to exchange the tax credit for advanced fundable tax credits, one of the great things about the proposal in front of this is that we are finally starting to treat people who don't have employer provided health insurance, equalizing the tax treatment for those. there are 160, 170 million people across the country that have employer provided tax insurance. it's through the $45,000 household, husband and wife of two kids, you get no tax preference at all if your employer doesn't provide insurance. this legislation addresses that. now, my colleagues on the other side don't think it's
sufficient enough, don't think it's substantial. why are you suggesting to the chair that she addressed back to the rules committee but no, you offer a press release as a motion. this is typical washington speak that doesn't advance the process. that doesn't change anything. it's just looking to score political points. it's not looking to fix anything. frankly my friends, we've got to fix themess that the aca has created in the self-help insurance markets across the country , and that is what we are trying to do as mister mcclintock said, this is novel plan. this is the first step on making a full plan to replace it, i yield back . >> the gentleman from wisconsin.>> thank you. this thing is important when you try to push this motion where snd today. we are at a int ere 30 percent of counties, there's
only one plant left. if we wait another year, i'm not sure how many, there would be a boatload, we wouldn't have any at all. and when you have so little competition, it's not surprising the premiums are going up by 25 percent this year. some commentators want to say we ought to wait a year before taking this vote and if we waited a year, we would see what premium increase you would have when you have no competition at all. this bill today, the goal of this bill today is to bring a little more free-market compensation into the healthcare market which will resort in overall health care drop. overall healthcare costs drop. there are individual businesses out there in the market who are doing a great job getting their healthcare costs and are doing it because they are not stuck in an obamacare monopoly situation. there is no reason why healthcare costs should be evolving.
healthcare procedures, they are not covered byinsurance and like everything else driven by technology , things like cosmetic surgery or our fault. through a variety of means, ours was they directed their employees to have healthcare costs well below these big increases in obamacare. so again, i think people have to remember what a train wreck obamacare is and even more what a train wreck it would be if the responsible people had their way. we waited a year to see exactly at happens when the government tries to make over the economy. >> madam chairman, i conclude by pointing t that the
reason the cbo notes and initial drop-off in enrollment and an increase in premiums is they believe the only reason many people purchase these plans is because they are forced to buy them. that's one of obamacare's failures. markets work on choices made by consumers and the republican vision has always been one of a vibrant and competitive market where consumers have the widest possible range of choices and a supportive tax code to make sure every person has basic coverage within their financial reach, i yield back. >> mister boyle, the proponent of the motion is recognized for one minute to close. >> i have to give the designers of the trumpcare credit . this is somehow more damaging to working americans in a straightforward repeal of the aca would have been. according to the nonpartisan conventional budget office, premiums will grow 24 to 29 percent in just two years. 52 million americans will be
uninsured within 10 years. $170 billion will be trimmed from the medicare trust fund, moving up the insolvency date by 20 years, and the number of americans covered in the employer-provided insurance market, not exchanges, willful by 7 million. all of the evidence suggests this bill will worsen every aspect of our healthcare system and return us to a time before the aca when coverage is neither accessible nor affordable. the burden is on the trumpet administration to prove otherwise and finally make good on its promises, thank you madam. >> the question on agreeing to the motion offered by mister boyle, all those in favor signify by saying one. those voters, no. the nose have. rollcall vote has been requested, the clerk will call the role. >>.
>>. [roll call] are there any members who have not voted or wish to change vote? if not, the clerk will report. >> madam chairman, the eyes are 20 and the nose or 14. >> the nose have it and the motion is not agreed to. i know recognized mister higgins for the purpose of a motion. i want to remind you there's nine minutes on the clock and you will each get one minute to close. >> madam chair i have amotion at the desk . >> emotion offered by representative torres, mister higgins, we moved at the commission on the budget director german to request on behalf of the committee that the rule for consideration of the american healthcare act face in order in amendment
that would strike all provisions in the bill but reduce the number of americans with health insurance coverage, increased costs or reduce the number of americans with health insurance coverage for poor middle-class houses and two, strike the bill for the wealthy companies and their executives in the pharmaceutical company. >> mister higgins is a recognized for a total of 10 minutes with one minute to close . >> thank you madam chairman. yesterday, president trump said that we are involved in a big, fat, beautiful negotiation. we are negotiating with everybody regarding healthcare. no you're not, mister president. this mess belongs to you. house republicans and the insurance industry exclusively. this plan is a scam. being perpetrated on and against the american people.
if you're 50 to 62 years old, you get clobbered. in fact, according to the republican lead congressional et oice, if you are 64 and make $26,000 a year, your health insurance bill will increase under your plan by more than $12,0. $1700 a year to $14,000. by way, i would remind my colleagues and you should know the white house scored this bill as well and there's a reason why you don't know about that. but let me get to the fact of the presidents characterization. united healthcare is one of the largest healthcare providers in america, a private insurance company. their ceo in 2004 was compensated with $66 million.
he actually took a pay cut because he made $102 million in 2010. there is a provision in this bill that says explicitly, this bill will allow insurance companies to claim exorbitant executive compensation as a business expense for deduction from taxes. okay? >> three weeks ago the department of justice opened up an investigation on united healthcare for overbilling the medicare program not by tens of millions of dollars, not by hundreds of millions but by millions of dollars. you are going to vote this massive tax, united healthcare, their executives and their cronies in the midst of all of this. this is morally reprehensible. i now yield three minutes to mister connor. >> thank you mister higgins. the cbo report shows the
numbers there just don't add up. you can't say that you are going to save $1 trillion in the deficit both less subsidy than they are getting under the affordable care act and still claim that people are going to lose their insurance . so my concern, and the reason i brought this motion with mister higgins is it's just be honest about what's going on. if you want to give people less funding to buy subsidies because you think that's going to lower some part of the deficit, then just say you don't care about people who are lower middle-class, income families having insurance. it's going to mean less people are getting medicaid, is more important to give tax breaks or tax cuts to grow the economy. this is going to help the
deficit but what's wrong about this is let's not defend. let's have a philosophical debate about the issue. do we care about expanding coverage which is going to cost more and is it worth that cost as a society or do we care more about reducing cost and taking money away? we can debate that, but let's have a debate about the facts and that is what's so disconcerting is we are not debating thefacts. i yield back the balance of my time . >>
healthcare plan at all. let's call it what it really is, a massive tax cut for the wealthy disguised as a healthcare plan. this bill is a $600 billion tax giveaway, the largest transfer of wealth from working-class families to the rich in our nation's history. tens of americans will suffer just so my republican colleagues can have the 400 wealthiest families in a florida 2.8 ilion dollar tax break each year. by paying for it this is how they do it, using medicaid, the insurance exchange as a piggy bank to pay for these enormous tax breaks. really a disgrace. >> one minute to mister moulton. >> a couple days ago i received a call from a marine i served
with who was suffering from addiction and needed health. that is why he called. he needed health. i like to tell my republican colleagues who want to go to this legislation to take a call next time and explain why that help is not going to be there next year for him. we are discussing not just caps and budget but our values. it is about what is right and wrong with healthcare in america today. under the republican proposal, it is right for the rich to get better healthcare. for the poor to continue being sick. it is right for the sons and daughters of the richest americans to be well cared for while the sons and daughters of our veterans who put their lives on the line for our cntry are left sick. this is about our values.
and i think we collectively are failing to meet that test. >> one minute to mister boyle. >> i can't help note there is a terrible irony about this trumpcare bill. we just went through an election like many places in the western world in which blue-collar families like the one i was born and raised in who have been suffering for 20 or 30 years standing still, we are looking for something different, sick and tired of being ignored by washington dc, you had a populist uprising throughout the western world after 30 years of stagnant incomes. what do our friends in the majority do to finally take care of them? they offer us a bill that actually gives a record tax-cut
to those making $10 million a year. i didn't quite believe it when i first heard about it so i read the language. if you are a ceo of a health insurance company who on average makes $13 million a year you will get an aggregate $400 million tax break. some popism. i yield back. >> one minute. >> thank you for your leadership to prevent this unprecedented shift of wealth from working people to millionaires, billionaires and corporations. let us be clear that this pay more for less bill is not a health care bill, it is a tax bill that gives $600 billion in tax cuts to the wealthiest and it is paid for on the backs of poor and middle-class households with one basic principle that seems to be consistent in this bill is the richer you are, the bigger your tax-cut. the top 4% of income earners
that are in northern $300 million a year will get a total tax break of $275 million, or about $200,000 a year each meeting working family see their benefits cut and their premiums rise. this is america. we don't begrudge people good fortune. but this bill is pure greed. the rich get richer while 24 million people are stripped of healthcare. that is not right. i yield back. >> i recognize the opponents of the motion mister smith from missouri for ten minutes. >> i clearly oppose this motion because it is our responsibility to limit the size and scope of the federal government and that is what this bill does. control of spending and save our country from economic despair. folks on the other side of the aisle talk about taking away from the poor you are talking about taking away from the
people i represent. i know the working poor. i know the lower middle class looks like because i represent the 14 most economically distressed congressional districts inhe country, that is out of 436 districts. in my district the median household income not of an individual, the household income, is right at $40,000 a year. 20% of the people live below the poverty line, according to kaiser estimates, less than 3.4% of people in my congressional district and rolled in obamacare through healthcare.gov. that is less than 26,000 people.
in south central missouri. those people, the 3.4%, were forced to participate in obamacare and in 26 of the 30 counties that we have in our congressional district, how many choices did they have? one. one choice. i will tell you what obamacare gave us. obamacare gave us in southeast and south central missouri very few options. it took away our doctors. president obama promised you can keep your doctor. we lost our doctors. he promised we could keep our healthcare plans. 4.7 million people lost their healthcare plans under obamacare. we lost our freedo.
you know what obamacare gave us? obamacare gave us tax increases on the poor and the middle class. obamacare tax wheelchairs. don't stand on that side of the island say poor people don't use wheelchairs. obamacare text the poor and the middle class. the majority was on the middle-class. over $1 trillion of taxes, 21 different tax increases. you can say you're talking points but if you are telling me the poor do not use medical equipment you are wrong and you tax that. you tax drugs, you tax numerous items. what this does is repeals $800 billion worth of taxes you all pushed on the backs of the poor and the class. in trumpcare, we are not taking away their healthcare, we are
not raising their taxes, we are actually giving them more options by stabilizing the market. our bill doesn't hurt the middle class like obamacare, it cuts $800 billion in taxes they currently face because of obamacare. it doesn't pull the rug from underneath the middle-class. cbo said after we restored the freedom for people to buy health insurance if they wanted, 14 million people will choose not to buy it. it will be their choice once again, no longer a mandate from washington dc. madam chair, i would like to yield two minutes to mister grossman. >> the problem i have with this motion is i think it is fundamentally dishonest about who is paying for this plan, who is getting the benefits. it falls back on the rhetoric
that somehow we are benefiting the rich and unfair to the poor. under our plan, a very generous medicaid program and we have tax credits and those are refundable tax credits. i don't like to put the word tax in their. it is a gift to the government towards your health insurance. in this country, i am not mister big apology for the rich. later this session we will talk about tax reform and any tax reform at the middle-class in the original plan. we have to be honest here. the top 3% of tax returns pay for 50% of government right now
which is to say the top 3% pay for these tax credits and the top 3% are generous medicaid program. and while on the other end of things you could be a married couple, you could make $40,000 a year, tax credits are phasing out when you make $75,000 a year. i wish everybody could make $75,000 a year but there are a lot of working middle-class guys making 75 grand a year and they -- their benefit is going to be phased out. when they got up around 90, 100, $120,000 there will be no benefit at all. what is happening under this plan is you are purely having the wealthy pay for the benefits. i don't know if you would call them poor but people without much money are the ones who will be getting something without taking anything in. that is was going on.
to say something otherwise is fundamentally dishonest as far as what is going on here. like many plans, something in which you don't have to work at all hypothetically to get these tax credits. that is not the wealthy. you can make no money at all and get these. on the other hand, if you are making, single person making 130 grand a year, you're paying for these benefits, a plan for today but to say we are having the wealthy somehow get a big benefit out of the medical system and taking advantage of the so-called poor is the exact opposite. >> thank you mister grossman. i yield a minute and a half to mister bergman. >> i want to thank the gentlemen for yielding time for me to speak on this motion offered by
my colleagues across the isle. it is fitting we are here today discussing concerns with healthcare policy that would reduce the number of americans with health insurance. policy that would raise costs for americans, policy that could reduce benefits in any way because had congress discussed these concerns when obamacare was being considered and passed maybe we wouldn't be here today. the reality is obamacare, the very legislation most of my colleagues on the other side supported his increased cost, reduced access for millions of americans had left the american taxpayer on the hook for this unsustainable health care law. under obamacare we have seen soaring premiums, higher deductibles on the narrow insurance markets and states
with only one insurer in their marketplace. millions of americans have found healthcare options uer obamacare to be so unappealing and unaffordable that instead of purchasing coverage, they have chosen to pay the individual mandate. according to the irs in 2016, roughly 6.5 million americans paid $3 billion for the penalty, $12.7 million claim that exemption from the penalty, roughly 20 million who decided obamacare is not worth the trouble, not worth the price. that is not increased coverage or better access to care. that is less choice, less freedom for americans across the country and the people in my home state of michigan who work hard and want freedom to choose what is best for themselves and their families. individual freedoms are the very foundation of our country. i encourage my colleagues to vote against this motion.
i yield back. >> i yield a minute to mister arrington. >> representative smith, 20% increase in premiums, $4300 in increased deductibles across the country, tax on the middle class, i don't know what is. i come from rural america, the rural district i represent, rural district like mine are predominantly middle-class and working-class folks, small businesses, family farmers, mainstreet american this. obamacare regulations are crushing rural hospitals, 600 on the brink of going out of business. how are our farmers and ranchers going to feed the american people in that scenario. i see it is out of time. >> the gentlemen's time is expired. proposal of the motion for one minute to close. >> the republican-led congressional budget office estimated the first year loss of those with health insurance is 14 million. the white house score they won't
share with you is 17 million. in this debate when you reduce it to its reducible essence you are either with insurance companies that are making record profits and will make even more under your bilor you are with the american people that simply want to pay premiums throughout their lives but when they need healthcare for them and their families they want to ensure it is there, without deductibles, without surcharges, without the added costs. we have an opportunity to work together to develop a plan that works for the american people. this proposal is not it. i yield back. >> to the motion offered by mister higgins. all in favor signify by saying i. that oppose no. the opinion of the chair, the nos have it. record the voters requested, clerk will call the role. [rollcall vote]
[rollcall vote] >> are there any members who have not voted her wish to change their vote? if not the clerk shall report. >> the eyes are 14 and the nos are 22. >> the nos habit and the motion is not agreed to. i recognize miss j for the purpose of a motion. >> i have a motion on the desk. >> clerk will read the motion. >> the motion offered by representative jackson-lee, moving the committee on the budget direct its chairman to request on behalf of the committee that the rule for consideration of the american healthcare act make an order in an amendment that would strike ling which in the ends the medicaid expansion, strength language in the bill that reverts medicaid to per capita and strikes new tax breaks for the wealthy and corporations in the bill. >> recognized for a total of 10
minutes. >> we are here today for the most tragic of reasons, to fulfill a plan that is the betrayal of the american people. house this planet betrayal? when you cynically strip 24 million people of healthcare and double the number of uninsured in the country from 28 million to 52 million, that is a betrayal. when you undermine healthcare safety net for more than 70 million americans like seniors, children and their parents struggling to get by on poverty level wages and people too disabled to work, that is a betrayal. last night on cnn i listen to secretary tom price try to counter angry rural doctors, retired teachers and cancer survivors who know that this bill is a betrayal and when asked by data - if he could promise no 55 to 64-year-old with the their cost increase 6 or a price could not answer. this motion would turn back the misguided attempt to strip $880
billion from medicaid from 14 million americans in 31 states across the country. the reality is even republican governors in states like michigan, ohio and nevada agreed medicaid expansion is a huge benefit for people in their states. in my home state of washington medicaid expansion has helped 600,000 people and cut the number of uninsured in half to 5.8%. stripping medicaid affect the million people who suffer from substance abuse disorders like opioids and finally getting much-needed treatment with one of the most cynical actions under this bill is the wholesale transfer of billions of dollars of medicaid costs to the states. this is the opposite of states rights, like telling states your left holding the bag and in this case body bags for the millions of people who suffer life and death consequences. i yield three minutes to this
jackson-lee. >> let me think the gentlelady. i'm delighted to co-author this amendment that really saves lives. this is really the lives of americans who are elderly, who are blind, many of them veterans, hard-working persons, and that is who is being devastated by the loss of $800 billion from medicaid. av in arkansas, nobody on this committee from kentucky but a lady from arkansas who asked senator -- >> the ranking. >> i was looking to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle. you are on the right side of the issue. i heard you eloquently.
this lady posed the question to senator cotton. my husband who worked, who struggled, is suffering from congestive heart failure, open-heart surgery, dementia, alzheimer's, they have insurance, $29 a month under obamacare, $39 for this hard-working woman. she invited the senator to her home. this is important because this bill is paid more for less. this is nothing but a devolution and an ending of medicare. the speaker of the house said that is what i am so excited about it, ending medicaid. people need to see the forest for the trees, weird the federalizing an entitlement block, granting get back to the states and capping the growth, that has never been done before. they are blowing up medicaid,
throwing people to the streets. as the scriptures have been quoted, where is the good samaritan? this bill will impact negatively 31 states who have expanded medicaid, able to help people. it would give a huge tax-cut the pharmaceuticals, $25 billion. it is the greatest transfer of wealth to the 1% of this nation, richest, and it ends the opportunity for the nursing home resident of my constituent who because she did not have healthcare did not take medicine and when she did not take medicine she's now in a nursing home with a stroke where she is without her faculties, and heart disease. but medicaid of obamacare pays for her. my conclusion is 73 million people in america get their
insurancfrom medicaid. you are killing it and denying it, you are taking away the lifeline. you are not hearing the stories, i ask to support the amendment. >> i yield one minute to miss grisham from new mexico. >> thank you to my calling from washington. i am joining in the $880 billion out of medicaid not only destroys families but you destroy the economy. governor martinez expanded medicaid, we have the highest uninsured rate in the country. now we are seeing our uninsured rates hovering about 10% or 11% in this economy, less 7700 mining jobs, 1700 utility sector jobs and a third of our oil rigs
have left. that means the affordable care act but 6100 jobs. we have the worst unemployment rate in the country. this $880 billion represents 900,000 people in new mexico getting healthcare. that is hospitals, doctors, practices, clinics, nearly half our population. it devastates rural and frontier states and makes them less important and less equal in this debate. with that, i yield back. >> i yield one minute to mister jeffries from new york. >> this bill is a direct attack on the poor, the sick and the elderly. once again house republicans are cutting taxes for the wealthy and well off and jamming up working families by devastating medicaid. trumpcare is not really a health care bill. it is a giveaway to the rich and
the shameless. this bill provides a $275 billion tax cut to millionaires and billionaires. health insurance ceos and executives get a $400 million tax cut. the top 400 earners in this country will get an annual tax-cut of $700 million per year. the great yankee catcher yogi berra should be quoted. he once said it is like déjà vu all over again. >> i yield one minute to mister higgins. >> thank you, madam chair. again, i think when you look at healthcare, the medicare program, medicaid program, you have about 155 million people. the federal government needs to view itself as a major purchaser of hell. use the leverage of those numbers to drive down the
costs of healthcare generally and prescription drugs in particular. the age group between 50, 64, takes a major hit in this bill, allow them to buy into medicare and they will reduce costs $7600 a -- >> for the remainder. >> this bill would decimate the medicaid program ripping away healthcare from 600,000 people in my state of washington. in my district alone medicaid expansion has been 36,000 more people are covered, that is 36,000 people who won't go bankrupt because they got sick. access to affordable coverage is not healthcare. it is a false promise. make no mistake, 36,000 people in my district will still need healthcare like katie, my
constituent who had coverage for eterni care thanks to dicaid expansion. when her daughter was born healthy and happy, she told me, quote, i honestly can't imagine what i would have done without medicaid. let's not go backwards. support this motion and i yield back. >> i yield back, madam chair. >> i recognize the opponent of the motion for ten minutes. >> thank you, madam chair. madam chairman, the motion put forward by my democratic colleagues is don't destroy medicaid and take away healthcare from the most vulnerable. really? i had to read that motion several times and still can't believe it is being offered. take away medicare from the most vulnerable? madam chairman, thanks to the affordable care act -- >> we break away briefly for a
senate pro forma session, live coverage continuing at c-span.org. the presiding officer: the senate will come to order. the clerk will read a communication to the senate. the clerk: washington,d.c., march 16, 2017. to the senate, under the provisions of rule 1, paragraph 3, of the standing rules of the senate, i hereby appoint the honorable james lankford, a senator from the state of oklahoma, to perform the duties of the chair. signed orrin g. hatch, president pro tempore. the presiding officer: under the previous order the senate stands adjourned until 10:00 a.m. on adjourned until 10:00 a.m. on
there is a waiting list for medicaid. the story is the same across the country, and my neighboring state of texas, a hundred and 15000, florida, 21000, illinois, 16,000 and on and on nationwide. hundreds of thousands of people with disabilities and the elderly are being penalized and punished through no fault of their own because on march 201, 2010 this house led by many of those across this date today, made a conscious decision to increase enrollment for young able-bodied adults into a program that was intended to help the truly needy, the elderly and disabled.
a gentle lady talks about my home state of arkansas. my state took the medicaid expansion. one of the many families affected by the neglect and traditional medicaid program in my state is a family of ms. scholar omen. she was born with a rare neurological condition and in a 2016 news report lindsay overman her mother said that she feared her daughter won't live long enough to receive the assistance that she has been waiting on nearly her entire life. skyler's condition caused her to have mulple shooters a day and her grateful mother is her full-time caretaker. the overman family and many families like them can't just call up a babysitter if they need to step away for a couple of hours. a medicaid waiver would help pay for that. under obama care we have seen medicaid rolls increase by millions of people, spending
increased by billions of dollars but unfortunately it has caused the needs of disabled peoples such as skyler to be put on the back burner all in the name of insurance coverage, not healthcare. madame chairman, i find it appalling that the needs of the truly needy people in this nation are being ignored to protect the political legacy. i believe it is well past time that we as leaders stand together and say no more. it is time that we return the medicaid program back to the purpose for which it was created and that is to help the elderly and disabled. i asked my colleagues in joining me in and untying the hands of our nation's governors so that they have the ability to take the federally provided money through medicaid dollars and assist their citizens the best way they know how. i urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to stand for those who truly need our help and oppose this amendment. i would like to now recognize mr. rowe kita for three 1/4 minutes. >> i think the gentleman for yielding. as the federal government has opposed more and more red tape
and regulations and the states have cut payments to healthcare providers. many who live in less access to quality care. medicaid recipients frequently have a hard time finding a doctor and often encountered in long waits and find doctors that will even accept it in its current) four. medicaid recipients often receive inferior medical treatments are assigned to last geld surgeons and receive poor postoperative instructions and suffer the worst outcomes that people on private insurance. in 2007 study by elmer washington found that medicaid's have longer hospital stays and were charged more for hospital visits then either uninsured patients or those in private insurance. uninsured patients have shorter hospital stays then those that are forced to take this broken promise. the american healthcare act put medicaid on a budget.
it doesn't cut medicaid and funding will continue and it will continue to grow to match the populations that are most in need. no longer under this plan, would reward states who don't treat their providers well or otherwise want to gain the system. with almost $20 trillion in debt this is the responsible thing to do, to care for our most audible front of two provide a proper safety net without a hemic and also begin making sure that the next generation isn't the first generation in first american history that will be worse off than the current one. it's never been done before. members on this committee shouldn't allow this to happen. this is the right way forward. please, deny this instruction. i yelled. >> thank you from indiana. i yield to mr. macy for three and a quarter minutes.
>> is member of the house budget committee, i think most most of us agree that our priority is to establish and enforce, control over our budget. today, as members of this committee we are given an opportunity to adjust the realm of healthcare. i am not debating the lifesaving health care that they provide to a vulnerable population we can't ignore the direction medicaid program is taking. my friends on the other side of the aisle claimed that by phasing out dedicated expansion we are stripping away coverage from the most vulnerable. i also heard the word betrayal. i believe the contrary is true. by continuing on this path of unsustainability, we are betraying our american people. we are slowly stripping away any possibility of prospects for our children and grandchildren. we are on an unsustainable path. we can't keep spending money we do not have.
if we sit and do nothing, at its current rate medicaid spending will reach 957,000,000,000 x 2025. again, unsustainable 2025. again, unsustainable. that's the trail. this reconciliation that were reviewing today take the first step in moderating our outdated 1955 design a medicaid. it has made it impossible to states to manage their budgets. by transitioning funding. capital a lot since we are strengthening our medicaid program for the future. to the american health care act states will have flexibility and innovative ways to reduce costs by tailoring programs specific to the individual population. in addition, a aca and power states and state stability funds with 100 billion to further assist states to cover low income populations. by making these commonsense reforms, we will finally be able to bend the cost that has crippled the budget for too long. if you haven't already gone it,
my.is, we are on an unsustainable path. we are the budget committee. in less than ten years we will be looking at a $1 trillion spending and come counting. it is unsustainable path jeopardizes the federal governments to provide that assistance to our most vulnerable patients who rely on thisrogram. the a hca empowers us to be better stewards of and it is the same thing american families have to do every day. spent within their means. it's the same thing small business have to do every day, spend within their means. do we need to take care of our most vulnerable ? yes, we do. today, tomorrow and tomorrow and in the future by spending within our means. the answer is being a better steward of taxpayer dollars and just not close our eyes to the fact that the current program is unsustainable. i yield back thank you
gentlemen. madame chairman to provide the best care to the most vulnerable , we not only need to deny this motion but we need to fully repeal the affordable care act through this spell and future actions and we need to enhance the spell to get states the flexibility to provide for their own. i yield back. >> the gentleman yields back. the proponent of the motion one minute] thank you, madam chair. let me summarize by saying cutting $880 billion in medicaid spending is irresponsible. you don't have to listen to me. listen to republican listen to republican governors across our country. let me quote to, nevada says expanding medicaid made healthcare accessible to many
nevadans who didn't have courage before. governor snyder from michigan, we have over 600,000 michiganders and we have a lot of positive data both in terms of behaviors and better outcomes helping people. madame chairman, the facts are clear. medicaid expansion provides healthcare insurance to those who otherwise cannot afford it and would remain uninsured. it makes coverage affordable for 16 million seniors. with people with disabilities across the nation and medicaid is the primary payer for long-term care and many millions of seniors desmet in fact, the only real team on i urge my colleagues to support. >> i yield active altama time. >> all those in favor signify i. >> in the opinion of the chair the no's have it. a recorded vote is requested, the cold will call the roll. >> no, [roll call] [roll call]
>> on their vote in the eyes are 14 and the no's are 22. >> the no's have it in the most is not agree to i now recognize the senator from massachusetts. >> madame chairman. >> the motion is offered by moulton in yarmouth. mr. moulton and yarmouth move the request on behalf of the committee that they would make a strike all provisions that they would alone or combination will increase total out-of-pocket costs for health care paid by individuals who are not millionaires and will increase the number of individuals that will not help it strike new tax breaks for the wealthy. >> mr. mullen is recognized for a total of ten minutes with one minute reserved post. >> thank you, madame chairman. we've heard that trump care increases choice and freedom.
let's talk about where that's true. here's how trump care increases choice. you'll have the choice pain your rent, your heating bill, and for treating breast cancer. the choice between paying for cancer medicine for your kids and having to declare bankruptcy to do so. here's how trump care increases freedom. freedom under the spell, literally will be free from having healthcare. they'll be having free from living longer and healthy lives. they'll be free from the overwhelming benefits of low cost preventative care. incling the benefit of keeping low care costs for all of us who do have healthcare, because it keeps those without care out of the emergency rooms where they get the most costly health care in the world.
i got a letter recently from larry. he's about to turn 69. his brother lives in a nursing home and within a year his brother will exhaust a savings and and will have to apply from medicaid to help. larry face that same prospect. here's what he wrote to me, i will not mince words here. this plan will result in a voidable suffering and many premature preventable agonizing death in the state and in cross the other states. all just to give 197,000 tax cuts to each of the top .1%. it's a false choice between obama care and passing this bill. unless you're one of the republicans who only voted to repeal at 65 before they came up with a replacement. or you're a republican who calls it a reasonable to date on this committee when were aimed weren't able to offer it. some of my republican colleagues
says this bill cut taxes for the lower cost. some ways it does. while dramatically increasing their healthcare costs. a caller from michigan said the obama care reduced access because it increased access for far more. these republicans talking points are missing the. it's like telling mrs. lincoln that the show at ford's theater was fantastic, aside from that disruption halfway through. we also heard that people back in our districts, in our districts want this change. really ? a new national national poll finds that only 24% of voters support this republican bill. even among republican voters, only 37% are in favor of the proposal. care about bipartisanship ? about bipartisanship? independent, 22% for the spell. a lot of democrats who are ready and willing to have a fax base, truth based discussion about how
to improve obama care. in fact, for many republicans are as well. voting for this bill only makes it worse for everyone. with that i'd like to yield to mr. yarmouth. >> thank you, mr. moulton. i'm proud proud to join you and instruct. let's take a minute and think about why were here today. republicans don't like the affordable care act we get that. republicans can campaign now for six years against the affordable care act promising to repeal it. we get that. but now it's put up or shut up time. republicans have been forced to actually come up with an alternative. were staying in this debate today and through these motions to instruct if you're going to come up with an alternative make it something that's improve the
situation. don't talk about the problems with the affordable care act. we understand that there are some problems. tell us how this plan takes it better. tell us how this plan provides quality care in an affordable price in a way that's better than the affordable care act. that's what we have and see we've even seen claims that don't make sense. i listened to mr. smith from missouri talking about wheelchair taxes. wheelchairs are exempt from the tax. as our most consumer medical products under the law. were saying his amendment, do not pass anything that adds to the cost of middle comerica, middle american middle income americans paid for by enormous by the major corporations and pharmacies. i yield back.
>> i want to thank and i yield one minute thank you. i want to thank my colleagues from massachusetts. i agree with many of my republican colleagues. here and in all of congress that we want to do something about healthcare costs which for many are too high in the entire system, actually is too expensive for most americans. in fact, the affordable care act to exactly address that was invested in preventing and treatment of the most chronic diseases. if we do that successfully and continually, with this this bill diminishes and completely destroys, the us could decrease treatment costs by $218 billion $18 billion. year and reduce the economic impact of chronic diseases by 1.1 trillion annually. this is in a bill about making
healthcare affordable and it certainly isn't about a bill that makes it affordable for middle-class families. this is about getting pharmaceutical companies who got us into this mess in the first place and get them diet bonus. >> i yield back. >> i think the gentleman for yielding. i have in my hand with's image. a whisk sandwich is two pieces of bread in which you wish there was something in between them. but there's nothing there. like a fish sandwich the republicans tend wish all the promises were there in from care but cruelly, they are not. our nation's uninsured rate is below 9% and those are the facts. the republican bill aims to rollback that progress by snatching healthcare away from millions of americans. now that we have a cto quote, we know that 24 million will be thrown off their health insurance by 2026.
in low income americans will be hit the hardest. ceo estimates 14 million people will lose medicaid coverage over the next ten years. it's not just numbers. were talking about children, packet women, seniors, disabled people's, and people desperate to make ends meet. not unlike a wish sandwich. that support these for $600.000000000 a wish sandwich is not with the american people were promised and it is simple. i yield back. >> think you and now i yield one minute. >> thank you, mr. mont. thank you for offering this motion. republicans claim that the repeal plan would make insurance more affordable for the american people. it will in fact just do the opposite. this bill especially raises costs for older americans by allowing insurance companies to charge seniors higher premiums than under the current law. the aarp estimates that people age 60 to 64 would be charged
over $3000 more every year for their insurance. many seniors living on fixed income and are already starting to afford the cost of their insurance. under this bill, they will stronger under more struggle even more. they will be in a worse position than a young individual might be. this will only lead to worse outcomes. it baffles me that republicans are willing to charge seniors more for their health insurance while giving insurance ceos millions of tax breaks. americans shouldn't have to pay more for less and older americans shouldn't be subjected to an age tax. definitely, not alternative text. i asked my colleagues to support this motion to instruct. i yield back. >> i now recognize the opponent of the motion, the gentleman from ohio for ten minutes.
>> i rise in opposition to this motion. i want to thank my colleague, mrs. wasserman schultz for speaking about the wish sandwich. i grew up eating wish sandwiches. i know what they taste like. the unfortunate thing is that the american people have been eating wish sandwiches on health care for the last seven years under obama care. the one thing that we both agree on is that we both want all americans to have access to affordable quality health care. we agree on that. unfortunately, obama care doesn't give us that. it's harming millions of americans. healthcare costs are skyrocketing, cheap choices are and millions are forced to buy insurance that they don't want. americans may have health insurance on paper but they don't have access.
there's a big difference between health insurance coverage and access to affordable coverage. let me give you two examples: cambridge massachusetts $18000 a year premiums, 9000-dollar deductible, that's $2700 out of thousand dollars out of their pockets before their insurance coany pays the dime. another couple out of richmon ohio, 20000 premium, $9000 deductible, $29,000 out of, $29000 out of their pocket before the insurance will pay a dime. folks, that's not access to affordable health care. instead expanding the number of individuals, we know that obama care penalizes americans who do not by a health care plan, often because they can't afford to. that meets the standards of washington bureaucrats but that
doesn't meet the standards of hard-working middle-class american people. millions of americans have found healthcare under obama care to be so unappealing and unaffordable that instead of purchasing coverage they've chosen to pay the individual mandate penalty. according to the irs in 2016, roughly 6.5 million americans paid 3 billion for the penalty and more than 12.7 million claimed an exemption from the penalty that's almost 20 million people who have decided that obama care is simply not worth the trouble or the price. in fact, humana recently announced that the company is leaving the obama care exchanges at the end of the year. it's reported that humana membership has declined by 69% since last year. the company is seen further signs of an unbalanced risk for. the company's withdrawal will
have a big impact in states like tennessee as humana is the only exchange insurer in several of the counties. unlike obama care, our plan doesn't impose a top-down government mandate to force individuals into any healthcare plan. it will empower patients to make the right healthcare decisions for themselves and their families. given the freedom that family should be able to choose the plan that fits their needs, it shouldn't be a surprise that cbo projects individuals will exercise that freedom. cbo confirms that most of the dropping coverage is attributed to the repeal of the individual mandate. people are no longer forced to purchase government mandated coverage. in 2018, while we transition from obama care to patient centered reforms 6 million people will stop using medicaid.
they will choose to purchase a plan that works for them and that they can afford. presumably, people are making the decisions based on their best interest. why is that a bad bad thing? additionally, our plans strengthens medicaid which is a critical lifeline for millions of americans. it's a good thing to focus medicaid on those who need it most, women, children, elderly, seniors and those with disabilities and let those who choose to transition off of medicaid, moved to a plan of their own choosing. i'd like to yield some time to my colleague from texas. >> thank you, mr. johnson johnson. a lot of folks in west texas wish obama care would just go away and i'm proud and excited
and delighted to have the opportunity to make their wish come true. i'm looking at the motion here. do not make a middle-class americans pay more, more than what? more than 25% increase on their premiums? more than $4300 and the increase in their deductibles ? folks, that's a huge tax on the middle class. obama care has forced millions of middle-class americans to pay the penalty rather than sign up for insurance. insurance, not care that they don't need and that they can afford. as as a result 20 million people paid the fine or got an exemption rather than sign up for obama care. twice the number of people who enrolled in obama care. all the while, 12 million other, mostly middle-class individuals and families suffered with increasing deductibles, increasing premiums trapped and forced into and unaffordable
care. as i said before, rural districts like mine are made up of small businesses and farms and main street americans. obama care and the crushing regulations have decimated world community hospitals. cbo projected that because of mandates we would lose millions of small business jobs. that's west texas. that's rural america. that's a tax on the middle class. i yield back to my colleague. >> i think the gentleman for yielding back. i yield two minutes to mr. ferguson collect from georgia. >> thank you. i'm going to read this. strike all positions from the bill that either in loan or in combination increase the total out-of-pocket care by individuals who are not millionaires or willing to increase theccess to care. mada chairman, mr. johnson i
owners and those with limited incomes come i guess they also want to know the answer, why this question wasn't asked and the democrats had the chance many years ago. i yield back spirit i thank the gentleman for yielding back. madam chair, we have heard it mentioned several times that the american health care act is going to cut medicaid. i don't think that's what cbo actually said. i think what fabio actually said is that by 2026 we would be spending a lot less on medicaid. now, i come from a business background, and there is a big difference between putting something and making something more efficient and more cost effective. that's what the american people have asked us to do and that's what we do under the american th care act.n
the people that need it. we put competition and innovation into the system so that it costs less. quality goes up, and those that are on medicaid today can begin to transition their lives to choose the health care plan that they want. to claim that the american health care act is throwing millions of americans off the medicaid bus is dishonest, it's untrue, and we ought to tell the truth. madam chair, i yield back. >> the gentleman yield the back. mr. moulton is recognized for one minute to close. >> thank you, madam chair. i'd like to yield to ms. schakowsky. >> i think the gentleman so much for yielding to me. i want to say to my republican
colleagues that you better proceed carefully. if you believe the myth of the lower costs, you do at your own risk. your bill proposes -- imposes a huge age tax on seniors, 50-64 in your district. and that's the reason why the aarp, 35 million members strong, opses the repeale ll. the cbo told us, and it bears repeating, that the cost of insurance for a 64-year-old earning $26,000 a year would go from 1700 under obamacare to $14,600 under the republican plan. these exorbitant premiums will leave millions of older americans unable to afford their insurance. and by 2026 the uninsured rate for americans 50-64 earning less than $30,000 would more than double to 30%, according to the
cdl. and here's the headline in the "new york times" article. no magic in our gop plans lower premiums. pushes out older people. if that's what you want to do, do it at your own risk. spirit time has expired. the question is on the motion to mr. moulton all those in favor signify by saying aye. those opposed cracks in the opinion of the chair the no's have it. a recorded vote is requested. the clerk will call the role. [roll call]
>> the motion offered by representative lee and ms. schakowsky, they moved the committee on the budget directed to chairman to request on behalf of the committee that the rule for consideration of the american health care act make an order an amendment that would strike language that prohibits mandatory funding for planned parenthood clinics for one year. >> i now recognize the proponent of the bill, ms. lee, for ten minutes with one minute reserved to close. >> iq madam chair. my motion is really very simple. it would strike language from the republican bill that prohibits mandatory funding for planned parenthood for one year. here we are again with a bill that attacks women and women's access to comprehensive health care. by defunding planned parenthood for one year this disastrous bill leaves millions of women out in the coldly.
shamefully, this bill would prevent millions of women from accessing critical healthcare services such as cancer and fbi screening and contraceptive care. even worse, more than 390,000 women would lose access, and up to 650,000 women could face reduced access to preventive health care. defunding planned parenthood is not just dangerous to the health of millions of individuals but it would also hurt our nations economic security. according to the congressional budget office, defunding planned parenthood would increase the federal deficit by 106 million over the next ten years. and what's worse, cbo found that defunding planned parenthood would lead to more unintended pregnancies, not less we know that planned parenthood is one of the nations leading providers of high quality affordable healthcarhealth care for women r families. in 2014 alone planned parenthood provided critical healthcare
seices to 2.5 milln patients, patients, more than 360,000 breast cancer exams and 270,000 pop test. in my home state a loan, california, served 776 women in 2014. 89% of which were women on medicaid. deny access to health providers such as planned parenthood will hurt women who need the services the most. low income women and women of color. i don't know if these are intended or unintended consequences. regardless, this is what you are doing in this bill. now i would like to yield three minutes to ms. schakowsky it was a cosponsor also of this motion. thank you. >> take as much. i am really proud to offer this motion with my colleague, congresswoman lee. here we go again. last week we spent quite some time at two in the morning discussing whether the provision
in the republican repeal bill actually targets just planned parenthood. the cbo cleared this up for us when it stated that in no uncertain terms quote, only planned parenthood federation of america and its affiliates and clinics would be affected. the witchhunt goes on. this is in direct contradiction with what the majority told us at our markup in energy and commerce committee. it begs the question why are republicans trying to pretend that this is anything other than dending planned parenthood? republicans claim that community health centers can just make up the difference, despite study after study, and the community health centers themselves saying otherwise. over half of planned parenthood health centers are in health professional shortage areas, rural or medically underserved areas. these are places that
desperately need more care providers, and get republicans are trying to make it harder for women in these areas to access care. and we're talking about a lot of women. one in five women use planned parenthood for their primary health care for cancer screenings, for hiv and std testing spirit and yes, men also use planned parenthood clinics. the cbo projects that about 15% of people living in those areas would lose coverage, would lose access to care. and there is no evidence that community health centers could take on all the planned parenthood patients or even provide the same level of reproductive health services. an abortion -- teen pregnancy and abortion rates are at historic lows. defunding planned parenthood and other reproductive health providers would take away the very services that have lowered those rates. i find it ironic that republicans claim that they want
to increase choice for people and allow them to make their own health decisions and choose their own providers. apparently that doesn't apply to women. so let me be clear. the republican plot to defunding planned parenthood is nothing more than a direct attack on women. and that's what i strongly urge support for this motion so we can finally remove this harmful provision from the republican repeal bill. american women are watching. and trust me, they are not just democratic women, but women of all stripes and political parties,nd i yield back. >> thank you. now i'd like to yield one minute to mr. jeffries. >> thank you. just when we thought the war on women was over, this outrageous bill comes to the rescue. i really don't think and don't understand the clinical obsession that many of my colleagues have with planned parenthood. it's unhealthy and it's unconscionable. planned parenthood does a
tremendous amount of good for the women of america. and don't just take my word for it. when discussing planned parenthood on several occasions, donald trump stated they also come however, service women. we have to help women. a lot of women are helped. so we have to look at the positives are planned parenthood. on another occasion he stated millions of millions of women cervical cancer, breast cancer are helped by planned parenthood. well said mr. president. i yield back. >> thank you. now yield one minute to ms. domain spec thank you. i support this motion to stop yet another irresponsible attack on women's health. last congress i sent to an unbelievable 15 month charade of a committee whose sole purpose was to spread false information about planned parenthood. now the majority is continuing
the reckless campaign by denying life-saving care to americans simply because they opposed a woman's constitutionally protected right to choose. sometimes it seems like all this jim does is attack women's health, but as long as that happens i will keep reminding everyone that 2.5 million americans receive essential care to planned parenthood. 78% of their of their patients are low income. planned parenthood annual provides more than 34,000 cancer screenings in washington state, and nationwide planned parenthood helps prevent more than 500,00 500,000 unintended pregnancies. politicians do not have the right to make health care decisions for women. it's that simple. i support this motion, and i yield back. >> now i'd like to yield one minute to ms. wasserman schultz. >> thank you. in yet another attack on women's health, the republican bill would defend one of our nations
most critical healthcare providers, planned parenthood approximately one in five women have relied on a planned parenthood center for care in her lifetime. the republicans will tell you that simply directing funds to community health centers will avert the substantial gap in services americans are going to experience as result of this devastating cat. but we know that is false. 54% of planned parenthood health centers are in rural or medically underserved areas. they provide care to women in the new otherwise have nowhere to turn. cutting this fund will translate to millions going without a high quality affordable health care provider. that is simply irresponsible. i thank the gentleman for yielding, and i urge my colleagues to support the motion. >> now i'd like to yield one minute to ms. jayapal. >> thank you for your leadership. like many of my colleagues i'm horrified at the maniacal crusade that the majority has been pursuing to destroy women's access to health care with
little regard to who actually gets hurt. according to a point by kaiser family foundation, 75% of americans agree that defunding planned parenthood is a bad idea, and that includes 57% of republican women a 55% of republican men. defunding planned parenthood hurts real women as well as poor and working women. three quarters of planned parenthood patients have incomes that are 150% of poverty or less and a only 60% receive services through medicaid or title x. more than half planned parenthood centers as ms. wasserman schultz that are located in medically underserved areas like real communities. the cbo projection is that 15% of those people would lose access to care. >> the gentlelady type has expired. >> i yield back. >> i now recognize muscle as a phone of motion for ten minutes. let me begin by saying that i been a nurse for over 45 years and so this is the subject
matter which i know about personally from caring for women and being a woman myself. we want to make sure that women have access to health care services and preventative care that they need, while also ensuring that our federal tax dollars are not going to an organization that performs elective abortions like planned parenthood. the republicans proposal does not take money away. let me say that again. it does not take money away. instead, it redirects these times to community health centers. these are nonprofit community-based clinics that provide comprehensive, yes, comprehensive care. i'm talking about centers at are able to diagnose and treat conditions. and they are in underserved areas with high levels of poverty and infant mortality. there are more than 9000 community health centers, facilities across this country. in 2015 community health centers provided health care services to more than 20 million americans,
nearly 60% of which were female. in comparison, planned parenthood circular than 3 million in 2015. let me go back and say that again. the communit community health cs served 20 million while planned parenthood served 3 million. though planned parenthood advocates regularly claim that women receive mammograms at its facilities. none of these organizations, 650 of these facilities, actually offer mammograms. in contrast, community health centers are major providers of mammograms, particularly to women who are hispanic, african-american, medicaid recipients, and uninsured. these centers have the ability to provide comprehensive women's health care services, not just diagnosis but also treatment. i also want to bring up a
report, this is not a report that comes from republicans. this report actually come some planned parenthood themselves. let's take a look at their own report. this is their own language. and this comes from the 2016 report. we haven't received the 2017 yet. contraceptive services have dropped i nearly 18% just in one year and are down by 20% since 2010. so the claim that women get their contraceptives from there, or services have dropped by 18%. cancer screenings and prevention services have dropped by 27% in just one year. and by 57% since 2010. overall total services, dropped by 11% in just one year and are down 14% since 2010. yet their recorded number of abortions are 323,999, basically
unchanged from the prior year. so if we talk about those preventative services that women need, we can see that the services are down, while their abortion services are maintained at the same level. on an issue of highly charged as abortion, where the american people are deeply divided, we should make every effort to ensure that their taxpayer dollars do not go to the nations largest single provider of abortions. this bill includes those protections. additionally it's important to note that this provision only applies for one year which will give congress the necessary time to determine whether to continue this policy for word in future legislation. and their report will give us an indication once we see the 2017 report, we will see if these services that my colleagues on the other side of the hold up as being services that are needed by women and that this is a war on women.
by the way let me just say, when i hear this phrase, a war on women, it makes me shudder. how many of those 322,999 babies that are aborted our female? you want to talk about a war on women? how many of those little girls will never be able to grow up and know about meeting their fullest potential? that's the true war on women, let's be honest. in addition, to providing an additional 422 million to community health centers that are not currently getting, but it will get, and if we were to listen to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, which is a report which by the way to admire is taken from the gentleman to name that was the original found a planned parenthood, so i do have a question about the report and we see differences in other
reports, but in addition to providing this $422 million to commit health care centers that provide for comprehensive care, that currently if a good overlook them, we should absolutely give them more money that serves the needs of all income women, the american health care act ensures that women on medicaid will access, this is an additional, to breast and cervical cancer screening and treatment xo additional dollars for the services will be given to these community health centers to be sure that when they take up these additional services they will have money to treat women for these particular services. i would now like to yield three minutes to my colleague mr. woodall from georgia. >> thank you, madam chair. i'll be hard-pressed to improve upon what you had to say. the truth is, when i saw the motions to instruct that were out and start with stop the gop bill from harming women i was speaking directly about the
community health centers and the work that they do. i was in the cosmos said in my district just two weeks ago, and exactly as has been said, using medicaid dollars get diverted to working, able-bodied men. using the squeeze on the intended recipient of the program. women and children, the cosmos said in my sent to start a dental clinic and the pediatric clinic because it so hard to find the women and get them into the clinic. folks are taking care of the children instead of taking care of themselves, using dental clinic and the pediatric clinic to expand their services, doing amazing work in that space. yes, this bill would add 10% to the community health centers budget i promise you those dollars are going to be used to serve. i went back and reread section one oh three which is the section of the folks are talking about striking. does say a word about planned parenthood. the say we're not going to find
clinics that provide abortions. i don't doubt my colleagues for a moment when they tell me that this isn't about abortion, that this is about providing services to women. i don't doubt them for a moment. i've never been to a planned parenthood clinic but i don't doubt them. what my chair will estimate is that this is a one-year provision. what i would say say to my friends is, if the abortion provisions of that planned parenthood provide usually such a minor and consequential portion of their portfolio, with what they're really committed to is mammograms and cervical cancer and birth control and a whole panoply of women's health issues we can talk about, you can count me as your advocate. the day planned parenthood decides that ending life is not part o of the mission, preservig life is. and that's all this bill as provided. my friend mr. jeffries says he wants to know when the war on women is going to be over. i would tell my friend there was never a war on women, but there
is a fight for life and if my friend believes the fight for life is overcome it is not. and if my friend hopes the fight for life will end, it never will. because i promise you there is not one person on the other side of this issue who cares more than any member on the side of the table. not one. we're talking about abortion. we are talking about life here we are not talking about women's health care services. the moment my friends conceived that abortion does not need to be a part of their portfolio, they can come in support, but today, madam chair, i oppose this motion and i yield back speak with a yield of the balance of my time to mr. arrington. >> madam chairman, i'm not here to rehabilitate roe v. wade as much as alike to the i just don't want my tax dollars to go to places and people that provide abortion. the vestment of americans agree and oppose using federal funds for abortion. this sentiment is reflected in a bipartisan hyde amendment that
we passed every year. barring federal dollars are being used for abortions. the mayor can health care act is merely enforcing the spirit and intent of the hyde amendment. since then only 3% a planned parenthood parenthood services go to abortion is to diminish the fact that they are the largest abortion provider in the country. to try to make the argument that planned parenthood doug do you see direct funding for abortions is to question the intelligence of the american people who understand the fungibility of money. and the fact that indirect support for this practice is supporting it nonetheless. to suggest this bill harms women is a hollow argument. and as the cofounder of women's health, i'm offended by some of these hyperbolic accusations for my colleagues on the other side of the aisle. the ahca does a right thing by enforcing the current law and the public sentiment regarding funding for abortion so i yield
back. spent all time is expired. i now recognize the proponent of the motion ms. lee to close for one minute spirit thank you, madam chair. let me say once again i am extremely disappointed that this fast-track reconciliation bill would defund planned parenthood and undermine the health and well-being of women and families. it's a sham and it's really a shame. republicans are making this about abortion when it's not and shouldn't be about members of congress interfering in women's private health care decisions. i would also like to note that while my colleagues on the other side of the aisle tried to tell us that planned parenthood doesn't appear in the bill, that simply isn't true. cbo is clear that only planned parenthood, its affiliates and clinics would be affected by this disastrous and this heartless provision. we know that for many women in america, planned parenthood is the only place they can access high quality affordable health care. we should be expanding access to planned parenthood so that more
women can receive care that they need and the care that they deserve rather than taking away health care for the most vulnerable women. i urge my colleagues to support this motion. thank you and i yield back. >> the question of agreeing to the motion offered by ms. lee. all those in favor? those opposed? in the opinion of the chair the ayes have it. spirit i asked for a recorded vote. >> the clerk will call the roll. [roll call] [roll call]
[roll call] [roll call] spirit are there any members have not voted or wish to change in the vote? if not, the clerk shall report. >> on the boat the ayes are 13 at the no' the no's are 21. >> the no's are -- >> the ayes are 14, excuse me. >> the no's havthe nose happene. the motion is not agreed to. i now recognize ms. delbene or
business of emotion. >> i have emotion of the desk spirit the clerk will read the motion spirit and motion offered by ms. delbene and ms. wasserman schultz, move the committee on the budget direct its chairman to retract a unethically the rule for consideration the american health care act of 2017 make an order an amendment that would strike language that accelerates the insolvency of the medicare hospital insurance trust fund i3 years by repealing the additional medicare tax on high income workers. >> ms. delbene is recognized for total of ten minutes with one minute reserved to close. >> thank you, madam chair. one of the most unconscionable parts of this incredibly dangerous bill is that it directly attacks seniors and the medicare program. medicare is a lifeline for more than 50 million americans including 90,000 in my district alone. my motion would protect seniors and medicare by eliminating the
irresponsible provision that robs the medicare trust fund of $170 billion. the bill we are considering unnecessarily weakens the trust fund solvency by three years, and it does this by providing the top .1% of the wealthiest americans a tax cut of more than $200,000 a year. this is a tax cut they didn't ask for and don't need, and it comes at the expense of our nations seniors. it's truly shameful. every day 10,000 americans turn 65. they expect medicare to be there for them, just as it was for generations before. in ten years, 75 million americans will rely on medicare for affordable quality health care. we should be strengthening medicare, not setting our country the path towards another unnecessary manufactured crisis. medicare reduces poverty and ensure seniors and people with
disabilities always have access to the care they need. i recently sat down with three seniors in my district at once kitchen table. doris and lance in kirkland, and grace from redmond. he told me how important the medicare program is to each of them by providing the kind of coverage they need at a price they can afford. if this bill goes forward with this provision intact, robbing the medicare trust fund and damang the programs future its doors, lance, grace and so many others like them that will be harmed. we should not be doing a bill that does nothing to improve anyone's life and especially not a bill that ultimate forces seniors to pay more for their care. it's hard to believe we are even you're having this debate. i now yield treatments to ms. wasserman schultz. >> i think the gentlelady for guilty. this is simple. we should be strengthening our medicare, not weakening it. but that common sense in my car
our motion aims strip away the childcare provision that would take $170 billion out of the medicare trust fund and shorten its life by three years. that is in stark contrast with affordable care act but it would extend the life of the medicare trust fund by 11 years. today, 58 million seniors and americans with disabilities depend on medicare for the health care including more than or million in my home state of florida. that number is not getting smaller. as our nations by pollution gets older over the next ten years that number increased to more than 75 million people. that means we assume a greater need for the program at your resources to support it. with this bill republicans plan to give the top .1 .1% of ameris a tax break of more than $200,000 a year, while on the backs of our seniors. a 64 yield with an an income of 26,500 into individual market will pay $12,900 more in their premiums every year. and to record this bill starts to put on the elderly before
they become seniors when you are in your 50s. in the words of the aarp executive vice president, before people even reach retirement age big interest of us could be allowed to charge in an age tax that adds up to thousands more per year. not only is that cruel but it is also unsustainable. under trumpcare all americans would be charged five times more than younger people come increasing cost for those already on a fixed income who can least afford it. though we now have a nonpartisan analysis confirming that trumpcare would deliver higher costs, less care and more pain to millions of americans were already struggling to get by, the majority remains as committed as ever to ramming this bill down our throat. according to the nonpartisan congressional budget office, that trumpcare bill would yank insurance coverage from 14 million people next year. the longer-term projections are even more grim with as many as 24 million people projected to lose coverage by 2026. now our republican colleagues are trying to discredit this
nonperson analysis, but no matter how you slice it numbers would be appalling. in terms of the toll on human health. i also note the irony the nonpartisan congressional budget office is led by director was appointed by speaker paul ryan and former congressman tom price was now the secretary of health and human services. it seems you can ask anyone except the republicans obsess with repealing the affordable care act no matter the cost and they will take this bill hurt our seniors and the very people president trump promised he would protect. we cannot allow trumpcare to make america sick again. thank you. i yield back. >> i yield one minute to the gentleman from california. >> thank you. i just want to echo ms. wasserman schultz, comments about what these cuts are doing. i highly recommend doctor wilander in "the annals of internal medicine," they point
out medicare is the most efficient program that exists. it's up 2.2% overhead. what we ought to be doing is extending medicare, not weakening it. and this provision, this bill, would weaken medicare and potentially bankrupt medicare by 2028. so i am strongly supportive of this motion. i yield back my time. >> thank you. i now yield one minute to mr. carbajal. >> thank you for yielding, congresswoman del bene and thank you for offering this important motion. approximately 127,000 seniors and persons with disabilities in california, 24th congressional district count on medicare to provide affordable, quality health care. that number will only increase as our nations population gets older.
we should be strengthening medicare, not weakening it. this bill takes a staggering $170 billion out of the medicare trust fund and shortens its lifespan by three years. this will result in more seniors living in poverty. it does this while giving the top .1% of americans, those with an annual income of 3.9 million or more -- let me repeat that -- 3.9 million or more of tax cut of more than $200,000 per year. this provision threatens our nations most vulnerable citizens, and for that reason i ask my colleagues to support this motion to obstruct. thank you very ideal back. >> now i yield to ms. schakows ms. schakowsky. >> i think the gentlewoman for yielding. candidate trump bragged actually more than once during the
campaign and after he was elected. this is what he said during the campaign, quote, the first and the all potential gop candidate to state there will be no cuts to social security, medicare and medicaid. he's done that to great applause of his audience, but the truth is that the promise will be broken if this bill ever becomes law. it would reduce the solvency by three years of medicare, snatching $117 billion from the medicare trust fund, to give the richest americans a tax break. this still allows insurers to charge older americans thousands more for insurance. increased costs to medicare, reduced funding for the medicare trust fund. and it's clear how house republicans intend to treat senior citizens. and actually it opens the door for more republican proposals, reopening the donut hole, taking
away free preventive care, turning medicare into a voucher program, which is something that the speaker of the house has promoted along with actually the hhs secretary, now secretary. and seniors across the country are paying close attention and have every reason to worry. again, these are reliable voters. they pay attention to the cost for health care, and i would urge all of colleagues to support this motion. i yiel back. >> thank you. again, it is critically important that we support medicare. i urge my colleagues to support this motion and i yield back. >> i now recognize the opponent of the motion, from indiana, for ten minutes spirit i think that interpret recognizing. every time and it with constituents in indiana i hear about the crushing burden that taxes that include an obamacare have on businesses and families. so if we're going to repeal this insidious law, thankfully we
are, doesn't it make sense to repeal the terrible taxes that went with it? obamacare has imposed upon us americans 2 21 new taxes, costig more than $1 trillion, many of which have impacted lower middle-class americans. in addition to hitting these families with increased taxes, obamacare also hits the same lower middle-class families by cutting medicare providers and services using those savings for yet new and more government programs under obamacare. it just continues to fascinate me that anytime the left gets an idea to help people quote unquote, they go to a new government program and they pay for it by taxing us even more. with absolutely no regard for the jobs that will be lost. if a company is getting taxed more, prive or public, they
have less money to hire someone with. and if they keep the person and the job they may go out of business altogether. because of these taxes. or if they don't do one of the two or a combination of one of the two, the consumer in set thing a higher price of the goods or services provided by these companies. ironically, the same consumers that the left proposes to try to help. one egregious tax in particular is driving up the cost of prescription drugs by increasing taxes on drug companies. who better to pay for your leftist plan that a profit-making companies like a drug company, right? that's what the left thinks. since 2011 nearly $17 billion has been collected from branded prescription drug manufacturers leading to higher and higher prices on those who have no choice to pay the cost like our seniors. and according to the congressional budget office this
tax is expected to raise $27 billion over the ten-year period. period. however, as all americans know those taxes were not borne by the drug companies, but in any common sense scenario, were passed on to the consumers into the form of higher prices. for example, gilead sciences reported in 2015 that there are $337 million tax lowered the companies earnings from $2.5 a share to $1.84 a share. it is highly likely that in order to recover that revenue to stay in business, to keep people higher, that they pass these costs along to consumers in the form of higher drug costs. this tax alo with most other taxes in obamacare need to be repealed. this will put more money in the pockets of americans who need it. older americans who need it. paying for obamacare is failed policies on the backs of seniors was not a solution when this law
was passed, and it is only gotten worse i totally support repealing this taxes and preserving medicare for future generations. now, thankfully because of the leadership of this committee over the last six years, we have put solutions in place. solutions that strengthen medicare to make sure that it's a rent for the next generation, and not continuing to add to our $20 trillion debt. did we get a better idea from the left when we put these ideas forward for the last six years? no. we got tv commercials. with a lengthy gentleman and shorter acting as if he was going to push and elderly citizen in a wheelchair off a cliff. that's what presents for the court unquote better idea around here. this committee needs to stick to its against it when you do repeal this insidious law and its taxes and we need to bring real medicare reform to this country so that it is a rent for our children grandchildren without giving them the bill. with that i would like to yield three minutes to the gentleman
from georgia, mr. ferguson. >> thank you. you know, it's amazing to me, i sort of feel like he does, madam chair, every time we turn around and look at the left they believe that they can tax there without of the problem. what we have seen after 21 new taxes d almost a billion do excllars,e me, almost $1 trillion of cost, is that we've seen an implosion of a health care system and a health care plan. what's happening is that the taxes, the $716 billion that were stripped out of medicare with the aca was used to not pay for health care and used to grow government bureaucracy that is crushing our ability as providers to deliver quality health care to our patients. i've been treating patients in my dental practice for 25 years. we understand that the ongoing
costs of regulation and burdens doesn't result in higher quality care for the patients. in fact,, it diminishes the quality of care, for patients whether they are young or old. it is something that i experienced firsthand year in and year out. the further this plan went along, the lesser my ability to spend quality time with patients and provide them to get that they needed. and i don't come from an area that is extremely wealthy. i come from an area where a majority of our population lives below the median standard of living. i come from an area made up of hard-working men and women that are fighting every single day. and one of the things that they want after a long career of working and fighting and scrapping to raise their families and providing income is they wo want exactly what someby on the other side just said. they expect and they want
medicare to be there in the end. what's happening now is that wqs when we say that repealing the aca will save medicare. it won't. massive reforms and an honest conversation with ourselves and the american people are needed to maintain the solvency of the program that is so needed by seniors and americans across this nation. if we don't reform this program and make it effective and make it sustainable, not only will we be unable to keep our promise on medicare, but because of the damage that the mandatory spending curve is having on our federal budget, will not be able to keep a single promise that we've made no matter which party is in control. being willing to have the tough conversations about this program
are important, because it's an important program. my mom and dad use this program. they worked hard all of their lives and they receive this benefit that they should. but i will tell you that if we continue to go down this road and we continue to kick the can down the road and we're disingenuous by saying that repealing the affordable care act will in fact, save medicare. we are fooling ourselves, and shame on us for that. we've got to do a better job. we can no longer look each other in the face and say, by stripping $716 billion out of medicare to save obamacare, to make obamacare work in the beginning -- >> reclaiming my time. like to record highs the gentleman from minnesota for the remainder of the time. mr. lewis. >> thank you so much. it is the height of irony that e other side offer a motion on weakening medicare. because the cruelest political
can't i saw in my lifetime was the idea that obamacare robbed $716 billion out of medicare, and they say that increases at the solace of medicare but then can rent and spend on the aca. that was the infamous double counting that everybody acknowledged. the total dishonest accounting, we're going to take seven under 16 billion out of provider payments that will increase the solvency of the program but then spin on the ac. ever wonder why women $20 trillion national debt? we can't count. the dishonesty of the counting is one thing. how the the so-called increase e solvency is another by reducing provider payments. not to insurance executives. it's the hospitals, doctors and nurses. do you know what that amounts to? and fewer benefits, viewer, less access and in fact, this week in the local paper in minneapolis-st. paul, i will read your verbatim, mayo clinic chief executive made a startling
announcement in a recent speech to employees. the rochester-based health system will give preference to patients with private insurance over those with a lower paying medicaid or medicare coverage if they seek care at the same time and have comparable conditions. now, that is -- when you get reimbursed to 70% of market rates, guess what can we are not interested in your business. that's what the affordable care act and that's what the other side did to medicare beneficiaries. and now they're talking about weakening medicare? are you kidding me? we've got two choices to save medicare. we can reform the system. because in 2024 when the program goes to a trillion dollars, it's insolvent. we all know that. so we can reform it by offering a new plan, a plan that the 1999 commission recommended. some form of premium subsidies, or we can continue on the other side by cutting provider payments and having doctors and
clint and hospice opt out of care for medicare beneficiaries. that is not acceptable. >> the time of the gentleman has expired. ms. delbene is recognized for one minute to close. >> thank you. the way to ensure health care system is working is to build off of the reforms we've already made, and make improvements come like a loving medicare negotiate drug prices. this bill does is the exact opposite. older americans want to see medicare strengthened and preserved for generations, not a tax. it's just another broken promise from this president who repeatedly committed not to cut medicare. this motion would restore that promise, scrapping a provision that directly attacks seniors and people with disabilities for no other reason than to give a tax cut to the wealthiest americans. whether you're a democrat or republican it makes no difference right now. this bill makes no sense and we all know it.
certainly not for seniors and now for those with disabilities. so for lance, for doris, grace and millions around the country just like them i urge my colleagues to support this motion, and i yield back. >> the question is on the grant of a motion offered by ms. delbene. all those in favor? those opposed? in the opinion of that year the no's have it. spent a recorded vote speak was a recorded vote is requested. the clerk will call the role. [roll call]
[roll call] >> madam chairman, -- >> are there any members who have not voted or wish to change the vote? if not the clerk shall report. >> on that boat the ayes are 13 and the no's are 21. >> the no's have ithe no's havee motion is not agreed to. i now recognize ms. lujan grisham from new mexico for
purpose of a motion. >> thank you, madam chair. last year donald trump promised to in the opioid epidemic -- >> if you ask for -- >> i just jump right in. i have a motion at the desk. >> thanthank you very much. the clerk will read the motion. >> a motion offered by ms. lujan grisham. they moved the committee on the budget direct its chairman to request on behalf of the committee that the rule for consideration of the american health care act make an order an amendment that would prohibit any provision of the bill from taking effect until the second of health and human services certifies that relevant, relative to current law its provisions and amements would not wt decreased coverage for mental health and substance abuse disorder treatment. increase out-of-pocket costs for mental and substance abuse
disorder treatment or undermine parody and coverage between mental health and substance abuse disorder benefits and other medical benefits. spirit ms. lujan grisham is recognized for total of ten minutes with one minute reserve to close. >> thank you, madam chair. last year donald trump promised in the opioid epidemic. republicans in congress from districts are some of the highest rates of overdose deaths in the country have pledged to provide resources to their communities, many of which some overdose deaths increased by more than 20% from 2014-2015. tennessee 13.8%. pennsylvania 20.1%. pennsylvania 20.1%. kentucky 21.1%. ohio 21.5. florida 22.7. after last year i really believed that addressing this was a bipartisan issue. but here we are with the bill that would repeal the requirement that medicaid cover basic behavioral health and addiction services.
in my home state of new mexico, i can unequivocally tell you what that looks like when you combine and opioid epidemic with a lack of services and behavioral health. opioid addiction has been a crisis in new mexico for two decades, long before the rest of the country. the stories of the lost lives are tragic, and they deserve to be heard. and in fact in january president trump said prescription drug companies are literally getting away with murder. and so i ask unanimous consent, rerd a collection ofto obituaries i have from a small dent in new mexico describing the victims of opioid addiction in new mexico. >> without objection. >> thank you, madam chair. this is from a small town, this collection, more than one death the week which was also submitted to the last white house and this one. many of them died because they
don't have access to the treatment that they need. this happens when you cut behavioral health and substance abuse services. people die. counting funds from the medicaid program and removing benefit requirements mean that even fewer people will have access and even more people will die. taking them off the medicaid rolls will mean that fewer people have converged to access to any treatment services that might remain. nearly 1.3 million people received treatment for mental health and substance abuse disorders under medicaid expansion. i urge my colleagues to stand up for the constituents that support this motion. i now yield to the gelatin from california mr. carbajal for three minutes. >> thank you congresswoman lujan grisham. i am honored to lead this effort with you. this motion supports continued access to mental health and substance abuse disorder treatment. i want to share with you all a bit from own personal experien experience. as a county supervisor working
as a local elected official, i saw firsthand the challenges of individuals or families with individuals who are going through hardship for not having access to mental health services. i saw her angst. i saw the crisis they were enduring. on a personal note, when i was a young boy, my sister committed suicide. i can't think but to think it would've been a different outcome if she had access to mental health services. this republican replacement plan will make it harder for people suffering from mental health and substance abuse disorders to access the health coverage they need. it makes dramatic changes to the nongroup market, provides insufficient subsidies to purchase coverage and cats $880 billion from medicaid -- cuts. low and moderate income people
will be hit the hardest. an estimated 44 million americans experience a mental illness each year, including over 10 million whose illness a serious enough that it interferes with their daily life activity. i urge my colleagues to support this motion and to support continued access to mental health care. thank you. i yield back. >> i now yield one minute -- [inaudible] >> thank you. i want to thank the gentlelady for yielding and for this motion. in full support of it, let me just say once again this bill thankfully repeals the medicaid expansion inking coverage for mental health and substance abuse disorder services for millions of americans. ..
low income individuals and people of color. i ho you care about the americans also. the consequences of what we are doing today really make me wonder. there are winners and some losers, excuse me and the most vulnerable people, unfortunately, are the losers. madam chair, as a psychiatric social worker , i know firsthand that all americans, all americans should access
the quality of healthcare. it's important for their care, their community and our economy. thank you and i yield. >> i yield one minute to ranking member yarmouth. >> thank you colleagues for yielding. this last month in my louisville kentucky district, emergency services received 52 overdose calls over the course of 32 hours. i have articles from the washington post, new york times, fox news, cnn and usa today that detail how the opioid crisis is affecting my constituents and i ask unanimous consent that they be included in the record. >> without objection. >> as my colleague mentioned last year on a bipartisan basis we made a huge step forward in addressing the substance abuse and mental problems plaguing our nation, kentucky was one of those states.
disproportionately affected but certainly not the only one. by removing the guarantee of mental health and medicaid enforcing 24 million people off their healthcare as well as eliminating the guarantee that private insurance, commercial insurance includes coverage, we are wiping out the games we made to ensure access to vital mental health services so i urge your support for the motionand yield back . >> thank you, i yield one minute to miss jackson lee. >> the sponsor for this proceeding the cbo, it's estimated that 49 million people would not have insurance. the cbo says in 2626, it will be some 52 million. among those are those who suffer from mental health issues. it is a reflection of the speaker's comments, yes. what we don't want to do is encourage more obamacare
insurance coverage plans. as my colleague said, sherry reynolds talk about her son who was drug-free for 16 months but she talked about her stepson jarvis who suffered from mental illness and killed himself in 2010 after he couldn't get medical treatment. the question is, where is our compassion? 1,874,000 individuals got healthcare coverage which included mental health coverage under the affordable care act. 1,000,092 650,000 individuals purchased high quality health insurance. by this trumpcare bill, mental health professionals will suffer and they will die. i support this amendment because i don't want americans to die, i yield back . >> back in madam chair, i
yield back to mister chair. >> i recognize the opponent of the motions poll of oklahoma for 10 minutes. i think the german forward time. i want to begin diagnosing what my good friend from kentucky said. last year we did something in a very good way, a bipartisan sense, we spent 500 million on this problem in grants around the country and passed a securities bill, major mental health overhaul and this year, the president has included an additional $5 million though this is a problem we all recognize exists and we are willing to do something about it but when i listen to the debate today, it's been a good debate and one that i think both sides have made sincere and detailed points on. i look at it a little differently from some of our new urban members because i was here last time we went through this debate as a member of congress when obamacare was enacted .
we were told at that time that if we mastered, costs would go lower. they haven't. we were told we haveore oices. we don't. we were told that if you like the doctor, u like your plan, you can keep them. for many people, twasn't the truth. in my home state we are in a crisis situation. our rates are going up 69 percent next year for those who pay the full rates and we are down to a single provider for an entire state and it doesn't sound like a successful system to me. when i look at the american health care act, i see several things. frankly, the three essential pillars of our healthcare which are employer-based healthcare where most americans get it, if anything goes back to this onerous, like tax rate years, something we need to get rid of all together.
we should never be taxing people for healthcare plan. it feeds the basic medicare functions intact and it keeps medicare for older seniors, although i agree with many of the comments made today, both these systems are in need of reform and the bill also provides a transition. for people that are actually getting healthcare through medicaid expansion or some other form of obamacare. this acts on a number of things which we ought to talk more about what it is. first of all, we don't want to participate in it, you don't have to participate. that's a big change from obamacare. second, it provides direct health to individuals in the form of refundable tax credits so you can keep what you think is best for you. that to me is the hallmark of any good healthcare system. finally, over time it lowers the cost of premiums and again, over time it lowers the deficit in thecountry, not a bad thing . so i think you want to leave
a failing system quite frankly and move toward a system that promises to do better than what we are doing today.i would also suggest the product is finalized. it's got to change during the course of the legislative process. it will change in the house and in the senate but staying where we are at is not the thing to do. with that i want to yield three minutes to my good friend in new york. >> i appreciate the opportunity. i think all of us recognize the need to ensure adequate and sufficient and good mental health services are available. i think as nicole stated, all of us on both sides of the i have come to that point of view. the bottom line is that this legislation is going to get states more flexibility in terms of how they design programs and i know that some
states will emphasize one aspect of the system over others. i'm confident our state of new york will be something that will be very significant to the designers of our plan but unlike the current system or new york state for instance has 100 plan amendments hhs. the state will not be able to design programs and policies that will efficient and effective and i think they will also be better oversight. we are on the budget committee and it's impossible for us to forget just a month ago, the cbo told us that the national debt is going to grow from 19 trillion to 29 trillion in just 10 years. it would be irresponsible for us not to seek ways in which we can lower that becker because we are otherwisegoing to leave our children and grandchildren with an impossible financial situation for them to deal with. another aspect raised by my
friends on the other side , the complaint about age banding proposals. right now, they call it age discrimination. age banding is 31, you can charge a six-year-old three times more than a 20-year-old. this legislation would give as the experts have testified before us, six weeks ago, we give states the opportunity to move to 5 to 1. the problem is going to be in states like new york where it has to be one-to-one in downtown new york state destroyed its own individual insurance market so the key is to create more flexibility, more ability for states to design programs and also to have more flexibility in terms of the insurance law because the insurance law , in fairness in the age banding situation, by not lowering costs efficiently for young, healthy people who did not have enough of those people in the pools to support the insurance market, and that's why so many insurers around the country have pulled out of the system. we have to have an actuarial sound insurance market to
function properly. that's why the option to move to a 501h pending makes sense. states do it and frankly we need to do this because that's how we will lower premiums for the vast majority of the american people who now are seeing extraordinary increases in their deductibles, extraordinary increases in their premiums and unaffordable health insurance. what good is insurance if you can't afford it? thank you mister chairman, i yield back to my friend mister cole. >> i'd like to yield the balance of my time if i made to my good friend from georgia, mister woodruff. >> i'd like to thank my friend for yielding , i've not gotten a chance to get to know each other yet and i appreciate your amendment but your cosponsor is one of my favorite folks in this body, she is a warrior for her folks back home she's a happy warrior and she someone you know you can work with on anything anytime because she wants to make things better
for folks back home and that the issue of this amendment here, i'm grateful for that. i don't know if you had a chance to read the hill, i'm not recommending that publication on a regular basis but i do want to recommend one of the editorials today because it's from one of our colleagues, tim murphy. if you hear a number of terms, timothy is a tireless fighter for mental health coverage in this body and it was almost entirely a collective way, 422 to 2 that we finally passed his bill across the finish line and president obama signed into law last week i want you to hear what doctor murphy wrote in his editorial today. he said while promising mental health insurance coverage, the aca did little to provide medical models of treatment for those battling mental illness and addiction. the evidence is staggering, skyrocketing rates of suicide
and drug overdose deaths at all-time highs. he said after a long fought battle in congress, president bush signed the mental health parity addiction act in 2008 but it wasn't until 2013 that the obama administration finally implemented parity, leaving many americans with behavior health coitions fighting with insurance companies, years after congress acted collaboratively to reform the law. this bill is going to offer about $1 billion in new flexibility for the great state of florida where we grapple with suicide and addiction. we are going to have opportunities to serve our population ways we never had the opportunity to do before. i oppose my friends amendment because i don't want a mandate that everybody has to do it the same way. i think regions that have high opioid additions are going to do it differently in
places like alaska who have high suicide challenges but it gives us the opportunity to do it in ways, in georgia that we have never had the opportunity to serve our constituency before. i encourage you to read doctor murphy's entire editorial but in it you will find that it doesn't matter what law we pass, if we lack the collective will to have an impact. and you will find that it's his belief and our experience that we do share that collective will and we could actually make that work. i respectfully oppose the motion to disrupt mister chairman look forward to working with my friend to make a difference, i yield quite a shield back the remaining time, miss slosberg from new mexico, emotion is recognized for one minute to close. >> while i appreciate the kind words of my good friend mister woodall and the balance remarks about, we all want to deal with this opioid addiction issue. we all want to deal with behavioral health issues and one of my very friends,
senator domenici was one of the originators of making sure there was mental health parity law in this country which has never been realized . i want to remind members there are two constants here. pharmaceutical companies and insurance companies who have no motivation to make it cost-effective or better . we are continuing to invest in their greed. we gave them non-negotiated prices, we let them sell our drugs that we pay for two other countries for $.10 on the dollar and don't allow any reimportation. everything that for, this congress has given them including the insurance companies were regulated by state and a facet of accountability. why would we give them the money we need consumers to have data access and really quick, i got seven seconds but new mexico already did it. you are over time. >> as i yield back ... we
>>. [roll call] >> are there any members who have not voted or wish to change their vote went to the gentleman from alabama. how is the gentleman from alabama recorded? >> mister palmer is not recorded. the polar, no. >> are there any other members not voted or wish to change their vote? fort. >> on that boat, the eyes are 14 and nazar 22. >> the motion does not pass.