tv U.S. House of Representatives Legislative Business CSPAN March 9, 2017 12:00pm-2:01pm EST
asbestos lawsuits, class action lawsuits and the bill that would sanction lawyers if a judge finds they filed frivolous lawsuits. first votes of the day expected just after 1:00 p.m. eastern. there could be votes on motions to adjourn throughout the day. this is the house live on c-span. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the prayer will be offered by our chaplain, father conroy. chaplain conroy: let us pray. god of the universe, we give you thanks for giving us another day. we ask your blessing upon this assembly and upon all who call upon your name. send your spirit to fill their hearts with those divine gifts you have prepared for them. may your grace find expression in their compassion for the weak and poor among us. may your mercy encourage goodwill and all they do and accomplish this day.
as the members of the people's house face the demands of our time, grant them and us all your peace and strength, that we might act justly, love tenderly and walk humbly with you. may all that is done this day be for your greater honor and glory, amen. the speaker pro tempore: the chair has examined the journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to the house his approval thereof. pursuant to clause 1, rule 1, the journal stands approved. the pledge of allegiance will be new y the gentlewoman from hampshire. ms. kuster: i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible with liberty and justice for all. the speaker pro tempore: the chair lays before the house a
communication. the clerk: the honorable the speaker, house of representatives, sir, pursuant to the permission granted in clause 2-h of rule 2 of the rules of the u.s. house of representatives, the clerk received the following message from the secretary of the senate on march 9, 2017, at 9:16 a.m. that the senate agreed to without amendment house joint resolution 58. that the senate agreed to senate joint resolution 1. that the senate passed senate 496. with best wishes i am, signed sincerely, karen averplet l. haas. the speaker pro tempore: the chair lays before the hot an enrolled bill. -- house an enrolled bill. the clerk: senate 442, an act to authorize the programs of the national aeronautics and space administration, and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the chair will entertain up to 15 requests for one-minute speeches on each side of the aisle.
for what purpose does the gentlelady from new york seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to "roll call" my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlelady is recognized. >> thank you, mr. speaker. the pell grant program is the back program of all federal student aid. these grants provide access and opportunity to thousands of students across the country. when i speak with north country students and teachers in my district, i hear about the positive impacts of pell grants. in my district an average of 52% of students attending suny institutions are offered pell grants. today's learners are different than previous generations and their advancement toward completion is stifled by a federal aid system built upon traditional spring and fall semesters. to support our students i've introduced the flexible pell grants for 21st century students act. ms. stefanik: important to extend pell grants year round. this will allow students to accelerate toward completion
and achieve their goals with less debt. we must do more to bring flexibility to higher action, and i encourage all of my colleagues to support this important bill. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back her time. for what purpose does the gentlelady from hawaii seek recognition? >> to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from hawaii is recognized. >> today let us honor and recognize a young maui boy whose lives touched hearts around the world and whose legacy will live on through the millions that he inspired. ms. gabbard: trucker duke was not only 4 years old when he took his last breath this past friday after a painful battle of stage four neuro blass thome and two -- neuroblatoma. like fire like son, trucker likes fire trucks. when he went to new york for treatment, the new york fire department coordinated a very special 3rd birthday party celebration and swore him in as an honorary firefighter.
after trucker passed away, his parents, shawna and joshua, shared this message. if there's one thing i hope is that you love a little harder, a little better. go home, stop the craziness in your life and just kiss your loved ones more, tell them that you love them more. none of us are promised tomorrow. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back her time. for what purpose does the gentlelady from florida seek recognition? ms. ros-lehtinen: thank you, mr. speaker. i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from florida is recognized. ms. ros-lehtinen: thank you so much, mr. speaker. since its creation in 1989, best buddies has grown into a leading nonprofit entity that has provided countless opportunities for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities. through its eight programs, participants are able to learn social skills, leadership development, integrated
employment and so much more. today, best buddies has a presence in all 50 states and has spread internationally across many continents. i'm also proud to say that the founder and the chairman of best buddies, anthony shriver, is a floridian and a constituent. this saturday, best buddies will be hosting its south florida friendship walk which will take place at museum park located in my congressional district, and i pray for a safe and successful event. i would like to express my tremendous appreciation to best buddies and the truly great people who support its cause. thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back her time. for what purpose does the gentlelady from california seek recognition? the gentlelady from california is recognized. >> mr. speaker, as chair of the congressional asian pacific american caucus, or capac, i
rise to honor our former colleague, the honorable eni faleomavaega of american samoa, who passed away last month. ms. chu: he was a true patriot and dedicated friend who served our country. his unwavering commitment to improve americans was woven into the fabric of his distinguished military and public service career. as the founding member of capac, he was also a strong champion for the asian .merican, native hawaiian he led notable efforts to secure critical funding for american samoa and worked tirelessly to cultivate stronger u.s. relations throughout the asia pacific region. it was a privilege to work with eni and i will never forget his warmth and strong dedication to bettering our community and our country. i thank eni for his lifetime of
leadership and service and send my thoughts to his family during this difficult time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back her time. for what purpose does the gentleman from tennessee seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from tennessee is recognized. >> thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i rise today because obamacare has failed the american people, and one of its biggest failures is that instead of lowering costs, health care costs have increased. americans are paying more for coverage and families are hurting. in my state of tennessee, premiums are rising by an average of 63%. mr. fleischmann: why pay so much for health insurance if you still can't afford to see a doctor? it puts us right back where we started, and no one, no one
thought the status quo before obamacare was good enough. i'm glad to see the american health care act was released, and i look forward to working on specific legislative details with my colleagues so that we can finally fix our broken health care system. thank you, mr. speaker. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from tennessee yields back his time. for what purpose does the gentlelady from new hampshire seek recognition? >> i rise to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from new hampshire is recognized. >> i rise to express my deep concern with the proposal put forward by my republican colleagues to repeal the affordable care act. most americans want to increase access to health care, lowering costs and cover more americans, but this bill, trumpcare, will increase costs, limit access
and cover fewer americans. ms. kuster: this plan will cut medicaid, which has helped literally tens of thousands of people in my state, in the granite state, access health insurance for the first time. its increase treatment and recovery services for those struggling with substance abuse disorder, we, like many states across this country, are grappling with a heroin epidemic. people are dying in my district from heroin overdoses and the fatal synthetic fentanyl. and for the first time, they have access to health care. they have access to drug treatment. they have access to recovery services, and yet this bill will pull the rug out from underneath these granite staters and their families. i urge our colleagues to vote no.
thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from ohio seek recognition? the gentleman from ohio is recognized. >> mr. speaker, today i rise to talk about melanie, a constituent from the ohio's seventh congressional district. melanie and her husband are near retirement. before obamacare, their monthly health insurance premiums were around $600. obamacare promised them reduced shurnls premiums and increased access to care. but this promise to melanie, like millions of americans, was broken. mr. gibbs: melanie's premiums skyrocketed to nearly $1,000 a month with a plan with a $5,000 deduct ibbling. it's more than her -- $5,000 deductible. it was more than her mortgage. the obamacare plans were even more expensive. while melanie's husband was looking for work, they depleted their savings trying to maintain health insurance. melanie is one of millions of americans who have been hurt by obamacare. it has raised melanie's
premiums and deductible and when she needed an affordable option in an emergency, it wasn't there. obamacare is collapsing. it's time to repeal and replace it and provides millions in relief. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from washington seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from washington is recognized. >> thanks, mr. speaker. climate change is real and it's so real that before donald trump became president he petitioned ireland for a permit to build a sea wall for one of his greatest golf courses in the world. mr. kilmer: it said rising sea levels from climate change threatened his property. but jose president he seemed to change his tune. a draft petition from the white noaa's program, zero dollars that provide critical resources for
communities that is threatening rising sea levels like his golf courses. i find this so outrageous. this is going to hurt people in coastal communities. i'd like to invite the resident to a reservation. an island that was once a football field away is now like a front porch. they'd like a brand new sea wall too but unfortunately they are not billionaires. they need a partner in the federal government to protect their homes. so to folks in ocean shore and coastal communities throughout my state. before releasing his budget, i hope the president remembers that it's not just his golf course that's at risk. we're talking about people's homes and people's lives and they deserve better than this. thank you, mr. speaker. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized. >> thank you, mr. speaker.
for allowing me to address the house. obamacare is hurting texas families, as you know. the law has led to higher costs, fewer choices, less access to quality health care and that is what the american people deserve. currently over 70% of the counties nationwide have two or fewer insurers. mr. carter: texas could see as much of a 48% rate increase in 2017. this is proof that obamacare is failing. hardworking americans and their families have been begging for an end to obamacare burden. it's up to this house to provide one. house republicans have forged a new path to patient-centered health care. our plan looks out for the most vulnerable and allows for americans to choose a plan that best suits their health care needs. i am committed to repealing the broken promises of obamacare
and replacing them with the health care that works for texas families. thank you, mr. speaker. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york is recognized. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. >> this is day 49 of the trump administration which has been characterized by chaos, crisis and confusion. mr. jeffries: donald trump promised to bring the jobs back. but the jobs bill must be in the witness protection program because for the life of me, i can't find it. instead we get trumpcare, a bill that would destroy health care in america as we know it. health care will increase premiums on the american people. co-pays will increase
on the american pill. trumpcare will increase deduct i believe so on the american people. it will increase the cost of prescription drugs on the american people. trumpcare will reduce coverage for the american people. trumpcare will be a disaster and that is why house democrats will do everything in our power to stop this reckless version of health care for america. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from indiana seek recognition? >> permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from indiana is recognized. >> thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today to recognize a historic accomplishment that took place this past saturday night in northeast indiana. in indiana, we love basketball. we refer to our passion for the game as hoosier hysteria. this special time of the year
or hoosiers, high school teams compete in the annual indiana high school basketball tournament. for this year, it turned into at a special season. a high school in whitley county first competed in 1918, over the years many great players wore the eagles' uniform. but the high school never won a sectional title until this past year. they claimed the aa sectional winning the first championship trophy in the 99-year history of he boys' basketball program. foothe said after the win, it is a huge accomplishment to the community knowing history was made. it means a lot to the guys that put on the jersies before us. i congratulate the eagles and the coach and the entire
community on this historic accomplishment. the celebration of this sectional title is was a century in the making. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois seek recognition? >> permission to address the house for one minute and revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. >> mr. speaker, for seven years republicans have been making promises about their secret health care plan and said under their plan nobody would have to carry health insurance if they did not want to and if they got sick they could demand for health insurance with no exclusions for pre-existing conditions and that their coverage would be better and cheaper than obamacare for all americans. while they made this is promises the affordable care act provided 20 million americans with lifesaving health care and republicans have now revealed
the secret plan and we see all their promises were lies. their plan will rapidly bankrupt medicare and millions will lose their health care. they did keep one promise, though, massive new tax cuts for the wealthy. and for that millions of american families will pay a terrible price. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from kansas seek recognition? >> i ask permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. >> mr. speaker, as a physician, i know firsthand obamacare is in a death spiral. now we are on a rescue mission. the president and our replacement bill repeals the mandates and taxes but preserves protections, we don't deny coverage or charging more for pre-existing conditions. two, we don't allow insurers companies to charge women more
and three, we allow children to stay on their parents plans. we are decentralizing health care, promoting competition and expanding h.s.a.'s. we provide tax credits, creating value pools and redirecting medicaid dollars back to those who need it most, children, elderly and those with disbilities. mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from kansas yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? >> permission to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. deutch: mr. speaker, today, march 9, marks 10 years since my constituent lob levinson disappeared in iran. i hoped i didn't have to mark this day or introduce a resolution. i hoped he would be home with his wife and seven children, one
of whom is with us today and six grandchildren. bob should be home in time to see his two new grandchildren born later this year. 10 years is too long. this family deserves answers. iran must stop playing games promising to assist finding bob, agreeing last year to open a new dedicated channel for bob's case. only time and time again refusing to follow through. iran must provide meaningful information that will bring bob home. this new administration must press iran at every opportunity. i stand ready to work with them and with anyone who's committed to bringing bob back home to his family where he belongs. thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia seek recognition? >> permission to address the house for one minute.
the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia is recognized. >> i rise today in support of the american health care act. for 25 years i practiced den ties try in georgia's third district and i saw the health care system. after obamacare was signed into law these problems got worse. i saw my patients, friends and neighbors forced away from their doctors that they trusted. instead of decreasing costs, i saw patients see their premiums skyrocket and deductibles skyrocket and access to care limited. i wan to do what's best for my patients and i committed i would congress to repeal obamacare and undo the damage it has done. the legislation we are currently considering in the house is just the first step towards keeping that promise. with this legislation, we move the ball down the field and gain
yardage rather than continuing to lose ground. this is not our only play but the first step to drive down costs and increasing access to care. this will promise our repeal and eliminate the individual mandate and allow patients to make their own health care decisions and drive down their costs. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? >> permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized. >> thank you, mr. speaker. mr. evans: i want to show you what repealing the affordable care act means to my constituents. 369,000 people who receive health care from their employers. 335,000 with health coverage that cover preventive care services to lose their coverage.
62,000 people covered by medicaid expansion could lose their coverage. 21,000 people who receive financial assistance will be at greater risk and not be able to afford coverage. these are the mothers, the fathers, the brothers, the sisters, the sons and daughters and the friends and the neighbors. philadelphia deserves a health care law that offers quality affordable care. we must continue to speak up and speak out against the new health care law that hurts so many people in our cities, our states and our nation. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from pennsylvania yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from nebraska seek recognition? >> permission to address the house for one minute and revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from nebraska is recognized. >> i recognize the dedicated public servant from nebraska with contributions to our community as an educator and
volunteer and a role model. mrs. woods has lived a life of service in the community with her dedication. she has encounselinged to be engaged learners. mr. bacon: her purpose is to equip, train young leaders and serves on the boards of several nonprofits in omaha and works to improve conditions for the homeless. she received an award in 2005 d ymca distinguished woman award. and she was involved in the creation of an institute which combines great ideas and organizations with boundless energy. mrs. woods has helped cultivate service in other bonds. we will do to adopt her inspiration. and i yield back. for eaker pro tempore:
what purpose does for what purpose does the gentleman from colorado seek recognition? >> permission to address the house for one minute and revise and extend. mr. polis: i rise to recognize the career of over 30 years. mr. zimmler served as the town of vale's manager for the past 13 years and acting as a deputy city manager in boulder and executive director and c.e.o. of the boulder chamber of commerce where i met him 20 years ago. to two errific impact important counties. he is about consensus building and worked hard with various agencies including federal, state and local government and u.s. forest service and u.s. department of transportation to enhance vale's local community,
international guest service and strengthen the economic positions as a sustainable resort. he has been active in colorado association of ski towns and won numerous awards for his service. and he will be missed in eagle county and we remember him fondly in boulder county. it is great pride that pay tribute to stan zimmler on behalf of the residents of the 2nd congressional. his distinguished service is an important legacy for many years to come. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from kansas seek recognition? >> permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from kansas is recognized. >> i highlight a few of my constituents who are struggling under the weight. kim and randall are two that obtained health insurance.
kim's premiums have more than doubled to $392 and her deductible has gone from $700 to $6,500. randall premiums are $700 a month. i reference these two examples because these are the problems with the affordable care act. coverage with deductibles approaching $7,000 isn't coverage at all. this week, house republicans have rolled out an initial plan to repeal and replace and doing this through the open committee process as we speak. online. ummaries are mr. speaker, obamacare has collapsed and work together to repair our broken health care system and give the american people access to affordable care. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> permission to address the
house for one minute and revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is ecognized. >> thank you, mr. speaker. i rise to oppose trumpcare. this legislation is a big league disaster. trumpcare will cause americans to pay more for less health insurance coverage and just doesn't affect the 20 million people who are at threat of losing health insurance but affects $156 million americans under employers whose premiums will increase because of the chaos that trumpcare is causing in the health insurance markets. i agree with senator cotton about once every three years. this is one of those times. we both agree that trumpcare is a disaster and that the house
republicans need to start over. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> permission to address the house for one minute and revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized. >> mr. speaker, i'm proud and honored to be able to serve in the united states house of representatives and serve on the veterans' committee. i did not serve in the military but i have an amazing blessing to protect our freedom to keep us safe. i'm filing my first piece of legislation today. and it is the veterans, employees and taxpayer's protection act of 2017. in my first hearing as the subcommittee chair, i heard with great concern and even outrage that 100% -- that some employees
at the v.a. spend 100% of their time on union activity. hundreds, even physicians and nurses and folks who are trying to provide or who are hired to provide health care to our veterans. 100% of their time on union activity. the law says their activity and time on union activity should be reasonable and in the best interest of the public. i don't believe in west texas or any area around the country that it is reasonable and in the best interest of the public to spend 100% of your time on union activity and not fulfilling the mission and in this case, it's protecting and serving and caring for our vets. . the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentlelady from texas seek recognition? ms. jackson lee: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the
gentlelady from texas is recognized. ms. jackson lee: mr. speaker, as we speak, 24 members, democrats, have been sitting with our republican friends in the energy and commerce for more than 24 hours, hunkered down on a bill no one has seen, no one has read, no one knows what it's about. contrast that to the affordable care act with over 79 hearings, over a two-year period, hundreds and hundreds of hours of hearings, 181 witnesses from both sides of the aisle, ongoing interaction with the american people. what did we get? over 20 million people, lower costs in medicare, medicaid, and employer coverage. what are we getting now in this document that is called the health care bill? loss of coverage with 15 million americans kicked off of health insurance, 73 million americans may lose their health insurance, undermining employer-based coverage, employer-sponsored coverage
that more than 177 million individuals would be jeopardized, no c.b.o. assessment of what it's going to cost, how many jobs will be lost and you will be paying more for your insurance and getting less. and the loved ones you have in nursing homes that are dependent upon medicaid even though they worked may be kicked out as they speak. o forward in the d.c. 24 #resistrepeal. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. the gentlelady's time has expired. and for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia seek recognition? mr. collins: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. collins: mr. speaker, i rise today to remind us the need to repeal obamacare. we have an opportunity to address the affordable care act. real simple. by gutting it. in northeast georgia i have heard again and again how my neighbors have suffered at the hands of obamacare. obamacare levied $1 trillion in new taxes. not considering the fact in
increased deductibles and premiums. the law have crippled our health care system. it's not accessible and not for my neighbors, not to your loved ones, mr. speaker. coverage came with no promise of quality health care and which insurance markets continue to crumble and families watched their health care resources slip away. the only way forward is to say goodbye to obamacare, goodbye to personal employer mandate, goodbye to necessary spending, goodbye and good riddance with that i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia yields back his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia now seek recognition? mr. collins: thank you, mr. speaker. by the direction of the committee on rules, i call up house resolution 180 and ask for its immediate consideration. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the resolution. the clerk: house calendar number 19. house resolution 180, resolved, that at any time after adoption of this resolution the speaker may,
pursuant to clause 2-b of rule 18, declare the house resolved into the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for consideration of the bill h.r. 720, to amend rule 11 of the federal rules of civil procedure to improve attorney accountability, and for other urposes. the first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. all points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. general debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on the judiciary. after general debate the bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. the bill shall be considered as read. all points of order against provisions in the bill are waived. no amendment to the bill shall be in order except those printed in part a of the report of the committee on rules accompanying this resolution. each such amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the report, may be offered only by a member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time
specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question in the house or in the committee of the whole. all points of order against such amendments are waived. at the conclusion of consideration of the bill for amendment the committee shall rise and report the bill to the house with such amendments as may have been adopted. the previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or without instructions. section 2, at any time after adoption of this resolution the speaker may, pursuant to clause 2-b of rule 18, declare the house resolved into the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for consideration of the bill h.r. 985, to amend the procedures used in federal court class actions and multidistrict litigation proceedings to assure fairer, more efficient outcomes for claimants and defendants, and for other
purposes. the first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. all points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. general debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on the judiciary. after general debate the bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. it shall be in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the five-minute rule an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of rules committee print 115-5. that amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be considered as read. all points of order against that amendment in the nature of a substitute are waived. no amendment to that amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be in order except those printed in part b of the report of the committee on rules accompanying this resolution. each such amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the report, may be offered only by a member designated in the report, shall
be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question in the house or in the committee of the whole. all points of order against such amendments are waived. at the conclusion of consideration of the bill for amendment the committee shall rise and report the bill to the house with such amendments as may have been adopted. any member may demand a separate vote in the house on any amendment adopted in the committee of the whole to the bill or to the amendment in the nature of a substitute made in order as original text. the previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or without instructions. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia is recognized for one hour. mr. collins: thank you, mr. speaker. for the purposes of debate only i yield the customary 30
minutes to the gentlelady from new york, ms. slaughter, pending which time i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized. the gentleman is recognized. collins during the consideration of this resolution, all time is yielded for the purposes of debate only. mr. collins: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials on house resolution 180, currently under consideration. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. collins: thank you, mr. speaker. i am pleased to bring forward this rule on behalf of the rules committee. the rule provides for consideration of h.r. 720, the lawsuit abuse reduction act, and h.r. 985, the fairness and class action litigation act. the rule provides for one hour of debate for each bill equally divided between the chairman and ranking member of the judiciary committee. the rule also provides for a motion to recommit for both pieces of the underlying legislation. yesterday, the rules committee had the opportunity to hear from judiciary committee chairman bob goodlatte, and congressman steve cohen on behalf of the judiciary committee as well as the subcommittee on regulatory reform, commercial, antitrust
law ranking member hank johnson. the rules committee made in order 12 amendments total, four amendments to h.r. 720 and eight amendments to h.r. 985, representing ideas from both sides of the aisle. i want to thank chairman goodlatte and the judiciary committee staff for their work on both pieces of legislation. i am a member of the judiciary committee and we've had the opportunity to consider both pieces of legislation and have enjoyed lively discussion on -- at the markups for both bills. mr. speaker, as you are aware, we've worked tirelessly in this house to pass litigation reform that will promote access to courts for all americans and ensure the cost of litigation isn't used as a tool to force settlements. we also talked to how to restore reason and remove burdens on hardworking americans. these bills help us achieve these goals. both bills have enjoyed thorough discussion both at committee level and on the floor, both in this congress and in previous congresses.
h.r. 720, the lawsuit abuse reduction act, was introduced by congressman lamar smith. similar legislation to h.r. 720 has passed the house before and i look forward to its consideration again. this legislation provides a balanced solution to frivolous lawsuits based on the simple principle if a attorney files a baseless lawsuit, the attorney has to compensate the victim of their legal action. this legislation does not change the standard for rule 11 sanctions. it simply gives this important rule some teeth by making sanctions mandatory instead of discretionary. opponents will argue this bill will stifle robust examination of existing law by discouraging otherwise meritorious lawsuits. to be certain, it does not change in any way the existing standards for determining what is and what is not a frivolous lawsuit as determined under rule 11. in fact, it expressly provides that nothing in the changes made to rule 11 will bar or
impede the assertion under federal, state or local laws, including civil rights laws or under the constitution of the united states. h.r. 985, the fairness in class action litigation act was introdiced by chairman goodlatte. this legislation now also includes the furthering asbestos claims transparency, or fact act, authored by congressman farenthold from texas. h.r. 985 provides a targeted solution to a unique problem. at its core the bill addresses whether the injuries suffered by named plaintiffs in a class action suit ack -- accurately lawsuit. he these claims have become a knee jerk reaction to attempts to address clear abuses within the legal system. we want to make the system work for the victims of all these abuses and other injustices. we want it to make it more -- we want to make it more difficult for anyone to take advantage of the courts and make legal recourse more
accessible for those who genuinely deserve relief. as a case in point, when congress passed the class action fairness act of 2005, opponents claimed that its passage would mean the class action suits. actually it had two targeted goals -- to reduce abuse of forum shopping of plaintiffs and to require greater federal scrutiny in class action settlements. you may remember an alabama class action involving bank of boston in which the attorneys' fees exceeded the relief to the class members. as a result, the class members lost money, paying attorneys for their legal victory. 12 years ago opponents of ccafa made arguments against the reform that they are making against 985 today. these objections are unsupported by history. in fact, researchers at the federal judicial center conducted a study on the impact nd concluded that post
enactment, there was a decrease based on diversity jurisdiction consistent with the congressional intent behind the law. we see that necessary reforms have resulted in the class action option that is alive and well, representing an important part of our legal system and it will remain that way. claims to the contrary, mr. speaker, just simply inaccurate. 985 is a targeted solution that says the party seeking the class action demonstrates to proof that each proposed class member suffered an injury of the same time and extent of the injury of the named class representative or representatives. this requirement already exists in rule 23 of the firl rules of civil procedure. unfortunately, not all courts interpret or apply these standards. to claim that this bill would codify existing standards would kill a class action suit is simply not supported by facts. class actions exist for a reason. a reason vindicated both by compassion and by wisdom.
it exists to allow a group of individuals who have been similarly harmed to seek appropriate compensation for their injuries. in today's world we see abuse after abuse of that legitimate purpose. as a result, we have seen a rise of class of people who may bear legitimate injuries but we also see countless others who suffered no injury at all. yet or -- the no injury class actions are designed to exploit companies to achieve quick payday through accusationes that are not grounded in genuine injuries. class action should be preserved as a tool who are h.r. 985 will allow courts to focus their resources on cases where people have suffered injuries. we hold responsible parties accountable for their actions. h.r. 985 includes furthering asbestos claims. the fact act is designed to reduce fraud and compensation
claims. this is a critical step to preserve resources for true injuries. for every dollar awarded to fraudulent claims there is one dollar less available who are suffering from asbestos-related illnesses. these victims are those to whom our country owes its greatest debt, our veterans. they comprise 9% of the population and make up 30% of the asbestos victims. veterans are uniquely situated o receive. the legislation will negatively impact their privacy rights. allow me to be clear, mr. speaker. this is not true. the bill actually requires far less personal information than state courts require in their disclosure documents. this legislation will reduce fraud and safeguard assets in order to compensate future
asbestos victims, veterans or otherwise. h.r. 985 and h.r. 730 will establish meaningful reforms. the united states is the greatest country in the world and our justice system is designed to be free and fair. we have seen our justice system being abused. these rules help us to right that wrong and they may not be perfect and strive to fix flaws to better serve the american public. and with ta, i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia reserves his time. chair recognizes gentlelady from new york. ms. slaughter: thank you, mr. speaker. and i thank my colleague and friend from georgia for yielding time to me and i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. slaughter: with this pack acknowledge of bills the majority is taking a ledge hammer to civil litigation.
and i know my colleague and i are not going to agree to that because i listened to what he had say. this is closing doors to people who are injured in the workplace and makes it harder for people harmed to seek justice. h.r. 985 is really a solution in search of a problem. it uses the false notion of rampant fraud in the legal system to shold corporate wrongdoers and deny relief. h.r. 906 has the potential to further victimize asbestos victims. and third, h.r. 720 would roll back significant improvements of the rules of civil procedure and repeat a failed experiment that led to a decade of problems in the courts. by requiring mandatory sanctions that ties judges' hands we saw unnecessary litigation. majority is wasting time and
taxpayer money to make changes that evidence and the experts tell us are not necessary and could actually cause more harm than good. it doesn't make sense. but consider, mr. speaker, how the majority conducted itself on the health care for a decade now. almost immediately after president obama signed affordable care act in law, there was a federal lawsuit opposing health reform. that was back in 2010. since that time, the majority has voted over and over again more than 60 times to undermine the a.c.a. c. cbs news has highlighted it cost the taxpayers $24 million a week to run the house of representatives. think how many millions of dollars of legislative time the majority wasted on these votes that never had any chance of becoming law under the previous president.
they wasted taxpayers' dollars and wasted precious time. the majofert spoke about repeal and replace and all the while they didn't have anything in the world to replace it with. former house speaker john boehner made it clear and wasn't until this week that the majority let members of congress and the american people to see their effort and it would be a catastrophe for families across the country and more and more groups and individuals are lining up against it. people would be forced to pay more if they could afford any coverage at all. the bill would defund planned parenthood, which more than 2.5 million people, men and women, rely on for life saving care like cancer screenings, every single year. it is truly positive that the majority is trying to rush this
bill without an estimate of how much this bill would cost or impact it would have on the insurance market. let me quote from a "washington post" story this morning, quote, while it is not uncommon for them to consider legislation without the congressional budget office first weighing in, veterans in the process say doing so on bills as far reaching as the health care overhaul is rare and ill advised, end of quote. we don't have any idea how many people would gain or lose coverage without the c.b.o. estimate. but we do know this bill would take us years before the days of the affordable care act where people were trying to get health care without any safeguards in place at all, when families were liable to go bankrupt from heavy health care costs and the a.c.a. protects them from that.
once an insured person has spent $4,500 a year on health care, the insurance company will pay he rest and for a family,, $ 12,555. that is something so rare and not talked about that i think is of vast importance and we would lose that. the billionaires would get a tax break, but working families probably couldn't afford health care. so we are rushing through this health care bill without a proper understanding of its cost or impact. the majority completely skipped the hearing process and therefore hasn't heard from doctors, experts or people battling an illness but i guess torturing people in the energy and commerce committee where they have been there for over 24 hours now. so we were encounselinged yesterday when we learned that the rules committee that white spicer said every
member of the house and the senate will be able to have the opportunity to have amendments offered well through the committee process, which looks like we aren't going to have any and on the floor, end of quote. but i do not in my enthusiasm for the notion that once we would have an open rule since under this speaker, we have not had any and democrats long to be able to offer some amendments to this bill. and certainly hope that that might be the case. the only way that happens is through the open rule. as i said, we haven't seen one of those this year. or under speaker's leadership. i hope the majority follows through with the white house promise of an open rule, because more than anything on this, the american people deserve an open and transparent process as this bill moves forward. and i reserve.
the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from new york reserves. the gentleman from georgia, mr. collins is recognized. mr. collins: it is often said that we discuss the issues that come to the floor and there are real debates taking place but i want to go back to the bills we rule andng with in the where do these issues come from especially like h.r. 985 and class action litigation. this came from the outside the walls and inside the real world where this is being practiced. and federal judges are looking to congress to reform the class action system which allows lawyers to fill classes with unmeritorious claim and uses the artificial classes to settle the cases. even a small chance of a devastating laws inherent in most decisions to certify a class produces the interim effect that often forces
settlement independent of merits of the case. what we are dealing with, many times in these class actions and i know the speaker is aware is the definition of a class depends on the case not as much as the merits of the case because of a potential devastating loss. it is the main driver in these cases. justice ginsburg recognized this. a court's decision to certify a class puts pressure on the defendants to settle even unmeritorious claim. that is pretty powerful. judge wood of the seventh circuit court of appeals has explained that class certification is in effect the whole case. then chief judge of the seventh court of appeals said one lacking merits forces companies to state their outcome or be forced of the risk of bankruptcy
to settle even if they have no legal liability. mr. speaker, listen to what these judges are saying. they are saying that the class certification is the most important thing because it depends on the outcomes and forces settlement. notice what was said here by justice ginsburg, unmeritorious claims. judge wood talked about it being the whole case. judge posner said they are forced to settle even if they have no legal liability. and another decision, the court wrote one possible solution is requiring judges to deal with the merits of a class action before allowing certification. that is approval of a class. it's cases like the one before us demonstrate why the courts and congress ought to be on the lookout to correct abuses. develop ossible to
perfect standards for identifying and disposing of frivolous claims. this court and other courts will be faced with cases that waste the time of everybody. beyond addressing the legal claims before us as we would, we must identify situations where we suspect the lawyers rather than the claimants are the only potential beneficiary. again, not coming in a vacuum. coming from the courts, who see this on a regular basis. from judge ginsburg on down saying this is the whole deal. this is why we do these things. this is something that needs to be taken up and we are proud to bring to the floor. and in doing so, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. mrs. slaughter. ms. slaughter: as we defeat the previous question, i will offer an amendment to the rule that would require a c.b.o. cost estimate to be made publicly available before any legislation that amends or repeals the affordable care act, may be considered in the energy and commerce or ways and means
committees or on the house floor. the committees on ways and means and energy and commerce are marking up repeal legislation today. legislation this significant should not advance through the committee process let alone the house without first hearing from our nonpartisan budget experts at c.b.o. on what the cost and overall impact would be. and mr. speaker, one of the most enduring similar brols is lady justice depicting the scales of justice that represent fairness in our courts. that central idea is embodied that a justice in the united states of america is supposed to be delivered fairly without any bias. it's no secret that sometimes we do struggle to live up to that ideal. we have seen evidence of that far too often recently. speaker, this chamber
shouldn't be actively working to tilt those scales to the rich and the powerful, but this is what this legislation would do. considering these bills, wasting money and time that we should be addressing our crumbling infrastructure and the skyrocketing cost of education. mr. speaker, we got from the merican society of engineering new grades on our infrastructure. his year, we get a d minus and so, mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to insert the text of the amendment to the record along with ex train youse material immediately prior to the vote on the previous question. and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the .entlelady yields back her time mr. collins: did the gentlelady yield or reserve?
ms. slaughter: i don't have any speakers, mr. collins. i'm happy to close. mr. collins: do you want to close, then go right ahead. ms. slaughter: that was it. mr. collins: thank you. . the speaker pro tempore: mr. collins. mr. collins: i think what we're hearing today and going through in this process is issues of real change. issues of discussions that have been going on in our country for really now almost eight years. seven years since the affordable health care, obamacare was passed, we're seeing the changes that have taken place from your time here and my time here in reeling with the dealing with the american people and the substances of what their concerns and fears are. the things i have come before this body and debated many times were what does the view look like from outside this chamber? inside this chamber we have
raucous debates, we have discussions on things. at the end of the day i believe sometimes, mr. speaker, those sitting at home say does anybody listen to me? does anybody hear my call? over the past few years we have seen through election results and we have seen through times of change here in this body that the affordable health care act is nothing like affordable. in fact, it is as many have described it, been in a death spiral. we're beginning to work on that. now, i understand how that can make the other side, the one who is gave us the affordable health care act, obamacare, would not ant to see that changed. -- want to see that changed. i can appreciate that. but real reality must set in at some point and reality says that to defend something that is failing is asking for a status quo that hurts people. believe my friends across the aisle don't want to do that.
but that's what they are doing. to hold on to a legacy it is nly a legacy for many of heartbreak and problem. did it help in some ways? are we finding some? did we address issues over the paths few years and begin the discussion of pre-existing conditions, keeping our children on until 26, removing caps? those were all discussed and could have been handled in many different ways besides the government takeover the health care. instead we chose to use a position to begin the process of moving forward. and moving forward in which government will put its finger on the scale and government will begin to say what is right, what is wrong, and what we found in the whole process was our individual market is destroyed. i have had some of my colleagues say let's start over and go back to the way it was. that would be nice except that land doesn't exist anymore. even if you wanted to, when there was trouble i don't think we need to, we need to look forward with free market solution that is put access to affordable health care for all americans on the table so we can
actually bend the cost curve so we can actually work to help people. that's what we're working on. we're going to continue to work on. making a smooth transition. from the disaster that many of us have seen over the past few years. when we do that, change will come. and change is hard. looking ack home are nor looking nor change that helps. like brittany who joined me here for the joint address who had employer-based health care which her family had taken. when she had to make choices about health care coverage and staying home, making choices that make families' decisions harder because they would rather make the decision to stay as a family but had to work because health care became unaffordable. it's these kinds ever choices we're laying out for the american people to listen. and to say what do we need to
do? and how do we need to go forward? when we look ahead, we take issues of health care, and the gentlelady is a friend. she states her position eloquently. and it's always good to be on the floor with her. we disagree. and this is the place for that disagreement. this is a time in which we share . this is a time in which we come together and what the republican majority will do, mr. speaker, is keep its promises. now, i have had a moment of sharing what we're doing in health care. but also let's get back to why we're here for the rule. the rule deals with abuses in the system. it deals with fairness. mr. speaker, today we're discussing the a litigation system to increase fairness and transparency. these principles are part of our larger goals as house republicans to create a system that works for the american people and restores
accountability in the system. we agree there are no -- legitimate lawsuits and legitimate class action suits. no one is arguing against this fact. in fact, i firmly believe americans should have access to a robust legal system that protects them. we encounter a problem, however, frivolous lawsuits are logged against small businesses and employers in attempts to profit without warrant and expense of jobs. these bills provide for the underlying rule to help us address this challenge and to ensure that the litigation system functions as intend tended. rather than being man nip plated to improperly tearget individuals or entities for profit. the rule itself provides for robust debate on these this legislation and amendments from both sides of the aisle. i would encourage my colleagues to look favorably on these bills as a step toward reining in unnecessary and burdensome regulation and making the legal system work better to address true grievances and harms. mr. speaker, that last statement probably sums up what we need to be about here. let's look at the truth.
let's help people. let's remember why we're here. and that is those who sent us. and with that, mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. move the previous question on the resolution. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on ordering the previous on the resolution. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. ms. slaughter: mr. speaker, on that i request the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. those favoring a vote by the yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this uestion will be postponed. pursuant to sclause 12-a of rule 1, the chair declares the house in recess subject to the call of the chair.
the speaker: ever thought donald trump would be president and tom price would be secretary of h.h.s. so number two, in our three pronged approach, administrative action with the health and human services secretary deregulates the marketplace allows more choice and competition to come into the marketplace. number three, and this is where i think there's a lot of confusion all over the map. additional legislation that we feel is important and necessary to give us a truly competitive health care marketplace. so think of things like interstate shopping. that's a reform that we long believed in. that i think is really important to get regulatory competition to give people even more choices. association health plans. let a farmer buy her insurance through the national farm plan or a restaurateur for his employees through the restaurant association plan. let small businesses buy their
insurance through the nfib plan nationwide. we would love for that to be in this bill but the rules in the senate don't allow that to happen. we're going to move those bills independently. we're going to move those bills at the same time through our process and bring those to a vote. unfortunately, they'll have to hit what we call the 60-vote threshold. we have a three-pronged approach to repealing and replacing obamacare. let's get into why this needs to happen and why it needs to happen now. options are disappearing fast. this law is in the middle of a collapse and people are quickly losing their choices. in 2016, the amount of counties in america that had three or more insurers, three or more carriers to choose from, was about 2000. in 2017 that number has plummeted. insurers are leaving the marketplace. choice in competition is going away. and people are having less
choices. how many counties in america that had just one insurer? a little over 200 just last year. so in america about 200 counties had only one plan to choose from, one insurer. this year in 2017, that number has skyrocketed to over 1,000 counties. over one in three counties in america, you got one plan to choose from. insurers probably never being on mon interoperable plus but they are in these counties. there is no choice, no competition, one plan to choose from. it's a 454% increase in american counties of people who are stuck with one option. now that humana said they are going to pull out of the marketplace next year, there are going to be counties that will have zero options. so here is what is happening under law that is collapsing. premiums are going up and going up at a very, very fast clip. options and choices are going down. what we're seeing in america is,
people who have to go buy their own health insurance are getting far, far fewer choices down to the point where they have one out of three counties in america anti-price they pay for that coverage is going up and up. take a look what's going on around the contry. this just shows you a map of the premium increases just this year alone. minnesota, 59% increase in their health insurance premiums pennsylvania, 53% increase in their health insurance premiums. tennessee, 63% increase in their health insurance premiums this year alone. over one year. alabama, 58%. oklahoma, 69% increase in their health insurance premiums. nebraska, 51% increase in their health insurance premiums. arizona, clocked in at a 116% increase in their health insurance premiums with obamacare. here's what's happening.
quote, obamacare is in a death spiral. it is not getting any better. it's getting worse. that's the c.e.o. of one of america's health insurance companies,et in a, said this a -- companies, aetna, a death also. a death spiral, what is it? it's a system where in an insurance pool only sicker people who absolutely had to have the insurance buy it. and healthier people who want the insurance won't pay those really high prices because it's too expensive and they don't absolutely have to have it because they are healthy. in any kind of a pool, typically you have a healthy person paying premiums to subsidize that sick person. but the way they set up obamacare, it's not working that way. so only the people who must have health insurance, the older and sicker persons buying it, it's cranking up the cost of the insurance so fast that the premiums are just spiraling out of control anti-insurers are losing so much money they are pulling out of the marketplace.
that's called the death spiral. it is a mathematical collapse of the insurance markets. that's what america is facing today. if we simply did nothing, just washed our hands of it, if we in the majority party said democrats gave us obamacare, let them live with t. the collateral damage in this country would befall. more and more people would see even higher premium increases in 2018. more and more people would see zero choices. we can't do that. the goal of health care reform has always been one we all chair. the goal of health care reform is people get access to affordable coverage. our goal is use choice in competition not government coercion and mandates. so here's what we propose. here is the american health care act, the bill that is moving through the committee process through regular order today, the bill that's going to take three weeks to move through the house because we're following regular order. lower costs. more choices, not less.
patients in control. universal access to care. these are the four driving principles that we're focused on, lowering the costs, getting people more choices, having patients in control, and universal access to care. let me walk you through ow -- how we propose do this. these are long-standing conservative principles that those of us who have been working in health care for about 20 years have been fighting for, drooling about, working toward. now we have an opportunity to do that. how do we do this? you have to repeal this law. you have to repeal the taxes in obamacare, the trillion dollars in taxes in obamacare that make harder to make medical devices. make it harder to lower costs in health insurance. that drive up the cost of health care. the spending, the spending in obamacare is getting out of control. it's a debt explosion. but more importantly, the way the system works is it's driving up the costs. and the mandates. the mandates are arrogant and paternalistic.
it is the government at the federal level telling people this is what you have to buy. it's going to be really expensive. you must do it. if you don't like it, tough. that's what the government is saying to americans today. so we get rid of the taxes. we get rid of the spending. we get rid of the mandates. the key thing that a lot of people want to know, when i do my listening sessions, when i talk to people with various disease, advocacy groups, they just want to know when we pass this the next day they are not going to lose their health insurance. that's not going to happen. we pass this law and the day after americans who have insurance aren't going to lose it the day after. we need to have a stable transition to conservative health care reform. that's what we're doing so we do not pull the rug out from anybody who is enjoying some kind of coverage they have today. so we want to have a stable transition. and a few of the points that i think are really important, just bring peace of mind to americans who are concerned about all that's going on here, we want to
protect people with pre-existing conditions. we think that's very important. that has actually been a cornerstone of republican health care proposals all along. in 2009, identify along with ngressman nunes, senator coburn, and richard burr, like many other republican alternatives, we had an answer for people with pre-existing conditions and we have one here. all of our republican health care alternatives have always agreed with the idea of letting young people stay on their parents' plans until they are 26. we retain that. what our goal is to do is to provide universal access to quality, affordable health care. here's another issue with obamacare. obamacare is not just the individual market that you think of the subsidies, it was also a taking over of the medicaid program. here's the problem with medicaid. medicaid is a program that will is washington controlled and it is done in such a way that it
stops innovation and experimentation at the state level. it makes it harder for states to customize the medicaid population and medicaid program to work for their particular states. and as a result, more and more doctors just don't take medicaid. what good is your coverage if you can't get a doctor? and that is a huge growing problem with medicaid. medicaid is also growing at an unsustainable rate so it's ballooning costs are threatening the very viability of the program and our fiscal future. so what we propose is to modernize the program. modernize the program along the lines that we as republicans have been talking about for years. i think it was ronald reagan in the 1970's when he was governor who said the states should take over control of medicaid. every budget we have had as republicans -- when i was budget chair writing my road maps or path to prosperity, every one of our republican conservative budgets said, let's get medicaid control back to the states. and in honor to the principle of
federalism, give the states and governors, the freedom, the flexibility to customize the care for their low-income populations how they think needs to occur. our problems in wisconsin are a whole lot different than the problems they have in new york or in nevada or in utah or california. so we propose more efficient spending, bringing the spending on medicaid to something that is sustainable so it doesn't go bankrupt, and have a safety net for the most. give local control to our states and our governors so they can craft and customize medicaid to work for their populations. how do you protect people with pre-existing conditions? i think this is probably one of the most important issues of them all. here is basically what happens today. under the current system, we have costs driving up. in the current system, options are going away. as i just described. choices are fleeting. prices are going up. and under the current system, the fate owe come pli of
obamacare is we'll make everybody buy our health insurance at the federal level. young and healthy people will go into the market and pay for the older people. the young healthy person will be made to buy health care and they are going to pay for the person who gets breast cancer in her authorities or heart disease in his 50's. so take a look at this chart. the red slice here are what i would call people with pre-existing conditions. people who have real health care problems. the blue is the rest of the people in the individual market. that's the market where people don't get health insurance at their jobs or buy it themselves. the whole idea of obamacare is the people on the blue side pay for the people on the red side. the people who are healthy pay for the people who are sick. it's not working and that's why it's in a death spiral. here's how we propose to tackle this problem. we want to have a system where we encourage states with federal funding to set up risk pools and reinsurance mechanisms. for example, in wisconsin we have a great risk pool that actually worked so that people with real high health care costs
and diseases and pre-existing conditions could still get affordable health care hfpblgt obamacare repealed that. they had a great risk pool on reinsurance system in utah, washington state, all those are gone. here's how they work and here's how our system would work. we would directly support the people with pre-existing conditions. let me give you a sense of this. 1% of the people in these markets drive 23% of the costs. 1% of the people in the individual health insurance market drive 23% of the costs. reassurance program is to cover more than just the 1% to cover the people who have high health care costs. so by having state innovation funds to go to the states to set up these reinsurance programs, we would directly subsidize the people who had pre-existing conditions. direct support for the people with pre-existing conditions so that everybody else has cheaper health insurance. what you do when you do this is,
the individual market, the people who don't have pre-existing conditions -- >> a couple of things here. can you continue to watch this briefing online at c-span.org. search paul ryan. the house will come back in for legislative works sometime between 2:00 and 2:30. here on c-span we'll take you live to the white house for the briefing with sean spicer. >> because there is only so many things that you are legally allowed to do through the reconciliation process. when the democrats jammed this through, they did it in a way that they did it basically in two steps. they jammed it through the reconciliation process, number one, and number two. they gave broad authority to the secretary of the health and human services at that time she could unilaterally do certain things with health care and implement certain things that we now have to undo in the same way. what we have done that's different, though, is frankly add a third prong which allows for additional legislative vehicles that will go through the house and senate that will
allow some of the core conservative principles we talked about for frankly decades about allowing more competition, allowing people to pool, allowing people to do things that we think will allow lower prices to come out of the process. i think that's a big difference in how -- reporter: land on the president's desk -- mr. spicer: it is going to land on his desk. reporter: repeal without replace. mr. spicer: the way we're doing now i think is the right and responsible way to do this. this bill will land on the president's desk. he will sign it. we will repeal obamacare and put in place a system that will be patient centered, that will allow the american people to have greater choice and lower costs. reporter: the pushback you are getting so far with health care, do you think it is realistic to have health care and tax reform done in 2017? i ask that you because mr. mcconnell was asked about this and he talked about there being certain constraints anti-tax reform portion of it could be a 2018 item.
mr. spicer: i think we feel confident we'll get a lot done, continue to get a lot done this year. tax reform is high on the president's priority list. it's high on the american people's priority. especially as april grows closer and closer and people look down at their federal tax form and realize how much they are paying. and we see companies pledging to come back recognizing that these companies bought into the president's vision and agenda to make america more tax and regulatory friendly so that they would create jobs, manufacture more here. that's something that he's committed to. he understands how important it is. look, the president's uniquely qualified as a businessman, successful businessman, to understand what a good business climate does to job creation and to manufacturing. i think his commitment isn't just a campaign promise, it's something that he has lived by for decades now. understanding that that's what spurs economic growth. that makes one place more
attractive to invest in or hire more people or grow jobs. for him, this is deeply personal. i think that you're going to see new tary new shin and -- shin and others work on it. reporter: it's still the timeline. reporter: congressman elijah cummings was here yesterday. he said the president was enthusiastic about his bill? is the president enthusiastic about that? if he is, how much pain should drug companies be prepared to take -- mr. spicer: ironically you are talking about drug companies and pain. maybe there is a pill for that. but -- i think the president, as you know, one of the reasons that he reached out to elijah cummings initially because they share that and i think frankly yesterday came to a lot of other areas they can find common ground and work on issues.
and i know that drug prices is something that he understands near and dear is helping many people get the care that they need. but the rising cost is something -- i think as we look at the vehicle in templets specific legislation, they share a commitment to it. and i think that there will be continued follow-up not just between congressman company cummings but others as to what the best piece of legislation is and how we get that home. reporter: they are going to drop this bill in two weeks. is the president prepared to push -- mr. spicer: that's a pittsburgh conversation that we have to have with house leadership in terms of maybe it is -- maybe speaker ryan and leader mccarthy and chairman brady have other ways to achieve the same goal or work with congressman cummings. i don't want to be perfect scripive to the house. -- prescriptive to the house. but i know the president has a commitment to that topic and he wants to work with congressman cummings and others who share that commitment.
thank you, sean. two questions. first a japanese news service is reporting this morning that the president will have a meeting with president penning of china in april. does this mean that there is a new meeting before their scheduled meeting at the g-20 in july? mr. spicer: i'm not going to comment on the president's schedule of foreign leader visits at this time. i think i pretty much gotten that one down. until i have something further for you, i'm going to let you get on to your next question. reporter: thank you. going back to the meeting and to your opening statement about the anks, in the last campaign candidate trump campaigned hard on restoring the glass-steagall act which would put a barrier between commercial and major
investment banks that was repealed in 1999, the repeal signed by president clinton. senator sanders campaigned on this as well. noted it was in the republican platform in cleveland. and said in december he would be happy to work with the trump administration on restoring glass-steagall. is there any plans for the president to meet with senator sanders? and is repeal of glass-steagall on his agenda? mr. spicer: there is no current skedle to meet with him. i'm sure as he has done with several other members of congress from both sides of the aisle that at some point that will be scheduled. we don't have anything on the books for now. but he's shown, and i think yesterday was another example, today another example, of his willingness to reach across the aisle. his willingness to look into both chambers. and not just business but labor unions and other industry where we can find common ground. if senator sanders and others
want to work with the white house on areas of ways we can improve the financial industry, we're going to do that. reporter: is he still committed to restoring glass-steagall? mr. spicer: yes. reporter: on infrastructure. a timing on the priority list, and if these new reports that say that the infrastructure in the nation is in bad shape, does that give it new urgency? mr. spicer: i think the president mentioned it in the joint address. i think we're looking at a public-private partnership. the funding mechanism. there is a loft work being done behind the scenes. i don't want to put a timeline on that. i just mentioned we have currently dealing with the repeal and replace of health care. i think we need to move on to tax reform. that is definitely somewhere that -- we're trying to figure out how to move that vehicle. there will be further discussion of that as we get closer to the budget as far as where that sits in to the piece. john. reporter: the president had his meeting here at the white house with some conservative groups.
how did that meet out of that meeting can you tell us whether the president was successful in twisting arms? getting conservative groups to back this particular health care bill? separately i see on the president's campaign website that there is event campaign-style rally planned in nashville, tennessee, next week. can you confirm that? why did you choosetown tfpblet there is a democratic congressman who represents nashville. hoping to get some democrats behind this bill? mr. spicer: on the first part of that you saw a lot of the statements that came out last night for. so various groups. they were very encouraging. their guiding principle is we want to get to yes. one of the things that's interesting, i addressed it earlier, is that there is a lot of members, a lot of interested parties, a lot of groups that haven't fully heard the three-prong approach. i think speaker ryan did a phenomenal job today of laying this out. dr. price has done a good job.
that people need to understand the totality and comprehensive nature of this. that there are three pieces of it. i think what happens sometimes is that the reconciliation piece of this gets lost as defining the totality of it. people need to understand the two other pieces that achieve many goals. that health care advocates and conservatives have fought for a long time. that allow greater competition. that allow small businesses to pool those resources together. but there is a lot of things that occur in phase two and phase three that help bring down costs and create greater choice. it's amazing when you listen to some of these meetings how often people say i didn't realize that. i didn't understand the full scope and totality of what the plan was. it's very encouraging. then i think they without getting into detail, i think in a lot of cases they have shared ideas with the president that we might be able to find some common ground on. so we'll take it one step at a time.
i would refer that question to the campaign. i think the president will be traveling next week. and then -- there will be -- the details that have are listed on the campaign site. there is going to be additional travel announced for next week on the official site. as we get closer to the end of this week or beginning of next, i'll try to have more for you. reporter: promise to immediately terminate daca when he got in office. it's been nearly seven weeks tomorrow. you still haven't done t can you definitively say if he's going to get rid of daca? if not is he giving them legal status? what's the plan for dreamers. mr. spicer: we talked about the stay tuffs that and how many steps we have to go through on immigration. we have made significant headway in achieving the president's priorities starting the wall, the numbers that came out last night show that even when seasonally adjusted we see a 40% dip in people crossing our southern border. that's a promising sign. that being said, the executive order, the second one, there was
a lot of effort put into making sure that that was rolled out effectively and achieved the goal of protecting the country that the president sought out to do initially. we're continuing to take steps on immigration, both legal and illegal immigration. as i mentioned in the past, we'll have more as we go forward. reporter: he does still plan to get rid of daca? mr. spicer: i think the president's been very clear how he plans to address immigration as a whole both legal andle illegal. reporter: there is opposition on the left. does the president plan to meet with the a.m.a., aarp which supported obamacare and not supporting this bill? mr. spicer: it would be ill-advised for me to say who -- i think what we have shown over the last couple weeks is the president's willingness to meet with individuals, senators, groups. i don't want to rule in who is going to meet. but i think that i have said before with respect to members
and i say it again with respect to groups, i think if people have ideas that will help provide a more patient centered health care system that drives down cost, the president and the team here will be willing to meet with him. i don't want to be prescriptive in terms of telling them who to meet with. their day is busy right now with the hill. i will get back to you on some of the other groups they'll meet with. reporter: two quick questions. one, this morning at the national press club a local trump man, regarding hotel, begins a suit, i don't expect you to speak to that issue specifically. but their feeling was that as much as this administration has supported small business, shouldn't he die vest himself from this and support small business in the district? first question. mr. spicer: i'm not sure how -- in terms of what? reporter: there's 25 small businesses, restaurants in the area. they are saying that the trump
hotel is taking that business away from them. could he walk away from it and help out the small business? mr. spicer: as far as the president's -- obvious lith president has made very clear in that december press conference at trump tower, he doesn't have conflicts and done everything in accordance with the guidance andon well beyond what he ever needed to do. but obviously you can't -- your name's on certain things that's a very big difference. in terms of the some of the properties that he owns. but he understands the importance of small business. that's why we're meeting with community banks this morning to talk about the lending that they need. whether it's small business, entrepreneurs, farmers, ranchers throughout the country. he understands the role of small business in our economy, and how many jobs they provide. i think he's been a champion of it. reporter: in his speech before congress last week he said it's not too much to dream at some
point in time. i'm paraphrasing. with the nasa budget being released yesterday, is there a major initiative by this administration for space exploration? or is -- are we just talking dream? mr. spicer: i'm going to let director mulvaney get into the details of the budget next week. or whatever that -- trying to remember the calendar here. but when the director comes out, he'll talk about the specific funding levels. as you know we're in the middle of this pass back provision. they are sending us back their recommendations and their observations and edits and questions with respect to the budget. we're going to take this one step at a time. reporter: when he said -- mr. spicer: he's very keen on america's role in space. i don't want to get into specific budget priorities or numbers until we're ready to release them. ohn.
reporter: sean, following up on john, we're seeing the campaign information for next week in nashville. you said something about -- who is the campaign? mr. spicer: i'll try ethiopia you get you a name. there is a campaign infrastructure still in place. it would be inappropriate for me to be commenting on campaign activities from the podium. there is a website up. same one that was on the -- during the campaign. i would suggest that you utilize that. i'm not here -- i'm only here as an official on the government side. i don't want to get into that. reporter: yesterday, going back, you talked about some other issues they talked about in that meeting. fraud and voter suppression. we heard from congressman cummings, where does he see -- we understand he's saying voter fraud is real when there are
other people there is not. there are factual documents and cases of voter suppression. how is there a marrying of that in this president's eyes? mr. spicer: that's why he asked vice president pence to look into it. i would dess agree there is also factual evidence of people voting illegally. we saw that in texas a couple weeks ago. other places. part of the reason he's asking vice president pence to chair the task force is to look into the issue. we welcome input and it's an area -- reporter: also congressman cummings said when he talked to the president and he brought up the issue of funding for -- president trump said the congressman cummings that the president did not ask for money. now, they came here, according to many of the --they came here with the intent they were going
to get some money from this executive order. mr. spicer: i don't think the executive order -- reporter: that's what their belief was. i understand there was talk about investment in these colleges. one president wrote this down saying that we're looking to invest in hbcu's and we will execute it when we get it. they are looking for full funding for title 3 pell grant full funding fall, spring, and summer, as well as $25 billion investment, one time. what does this white house think about this plan of them trying to get back to this white house, especially at a time when you are looking at cutting necessaryic spending? mr. spicer: when we were here we were pleased to rolled owl the executive order that talked about making historically black colleges and universities a priority in this administration. moving that sort of point person into the white house.
so that we could coordinate a whole of government opportunities for -- we talked about this. looking at the different educational opportunities. expand government. whether it's health or investment in sciences or even stuff like rotsy and -- rotc and other programs. but we have to look at how we're provideling government assistance in a whole host of ways to historically black colleges and universities. the issue of funding will be properly addressed in the budget. and at that time -- obviously this is something that has been discussed -- april, i'm not going to negotiate the budget from here. but i think the that the president has made very clear that the vital role that they play in our society and i think he's shown that initially by the executive order that he unveiled and we will have further information for you as we get close to the budget. eporter: characterizing the
budget reconciliation bill as the entirety of repeal-replace. how quickly does the president want to see republicans move on the companion legislation? does he envision those unfolding simultaneously? and then given the early opposition to the budget reconciliation bill, does the president maybe want the republicans to recalibrate their strategy when it comes to that companion legislation? mr. spicer: i am not going to start to tell speaker ryan or leader mccarthy or the whip, mr. scalise, how to release and when to release legislation. i think obviously we need to make sure that members and all americans understand the totality of this. at a schedule they see fit. i'll let them unsthrail schedule. that they talk about the totality of the plan and comprehensive nature and all three prongs that make up the repeal and replace part of this. it's important, i think, for people that do understand there is a commitment to those things
we talked about. whether it's pooling or across state lines. there is a lot of principles and things that we have discussed that i think are important to et people to know about. inaudible] mr. spicer: on troops i refer you to the department of defense on that one. we're in the middle of a comprehensive review on our policy in afghanistan. working with our afghan partners and the department of defense and key military leaders to create an approach to address afghanistan to defeat isis. so i -- we're in the middle of that process and we have more. we'll update you, but i think the department of defense is the best place to go. reporter: today hundreds of u.s. marines were deployed to syria.
i'm wondering how involved was the president in that decisionmaking process? is this part of his wider anti-isis strategy? mr. spicer: obviously the president was made aware of that. this is something that was done in consultation. he understands the reasonablal issues that needs to be -- regional issues that need to be addressed that. i refer you back to the department of defense. reporter: i have a follow-up question to haley's first southwest questions. le what on is -- the about the tech companies that he said that he will work with to give them the c.i.a. hacking techniques? should there be any legal repercussions for tech companies to willing sort of embrace and use this technology that you're taking a stance against, if you will? mr. spicer: number one, i'll go back to the statement that we n't comment on validating or
authenticating allegations of this sort as a u.s. government in terms of policy. i will say that the president obviously feels deeply concerned about anybody. an individual, anybody that seeks to undermine the national security of our country. don't want to -- as stay within my purview here, but do i think i would check with the department of justice in particular about if a program or a piece of information is classified, it remains classified regardless of whether or not it is released into the public venue or not. so i would just suggest that someone consult with them regarding the legal repercussions of any individual or entity using any piece of still classified information or technique or product that hasn't been declassified. there is a reason we have classification levels and that's to froket our country and people. -- that's to protect our country and people. that's something we have to
maintain regardless. reporter: how concerning is it to the president and the white house that a registered foreign agent was likely to -- the national security advisor for a brief period of time? mr. spicer: look, i think this is what he did for a living. he talked to -- as the president said in the press conference, talking to individuals that are within the realm of the duties you're going to perform is part of your job. he was being compensated. he wasn't being compensated as far as the transition, as far as i am aware. so he was a private citizen at the time. when are you a private citizen you are allowed to engage in legal activities. i don't have anything further on that. i think there is nothing nefarious about doing anything that's legal as long as the proper paperwork is filed.
reporter: certainly reports out the state department that secretary tillerson's upcoming trip to asia he'll not take any press with him on that trip. that's a break precedent of several bipartisan administrations. is it concerning to the white house that the administration's foreign policy might not be effectively communicated with the american public and around the world because there isn't a press there? mr. spicer: this is the first i am learning of it. i'll be glad to follow up. i don't know that. i think you-all know that we have been a very transparent administration in temples access to the president and his activity here. i would be glad to follow up with the department of state. you can share that with your colleagues. margaret. reporter: yesterday you said no reason to believe -- an investigation with respect to the detcht justice. did the justice department give you that assurance, because they are telingt "new york times" --
mr. spicer: we're not aware of anything. reporter: you just don't know? mr. spicer: i said i'm not aware. that's why we want the house and senate to do what the president has asked of them to look into this. no, we're not aware. reporter: to discover if there is an investigation. mr. spicer: to look into the investigation. reporter: the justice department said they never gave you the assurances you gave us. mr. spicer: the assurance i gave you is i am not aware. that's 100% accurate. reporter: when you said no reason to believe it was i'm not aware. mr. spicer: i don't know that they are not interchangeable. i am not aware, i don't believe. look it up. i don't know that there is a distinction there that's noteworthy. we're not aware. i don't believe that that exists. that's based on i have not been aware of. that's the answer to that. someone asked me film' made aware of something and the answer is no, the answer is no.
reporter: the question is whether he was the target -- mr. spicer: the answer is we're not aware. don't know how much clearer we can be. reporter: the white house is not aware if the president is the target of a counterintelligence probe? mr. spicer: correct. i'm not sure what we're dancing around the same question. reporter: i think yesterday when you came out and corrected an clarified, people took that as a definitive answer that, in fact -- mr. spicer: that means we're not aware. that should be the definitive answer. reporter: i have two questions ery quick followups. can you elaborate on how and what extent michael flynn was involved in shaping the current turkey policy? mr. spicer: i don't know. reporter: was he engaging with the turkish leaders? mr. spicer: don't have anything on that. i'm not aware. reporter: my two real questions. first, is there any official response to the lawsuit in
hawaii over the revised travel ban? mr. spicer: i think we feel very comfortable that the executive order that was crafted is consistent in -- and we're going to go forward on this. i think by all means i don't want -- we feel very confident with how that was crafted and the input given. reporter: thank you. second thing is it, the ecuadorian embassy in london today where aage happens to be staying. he's a close ally of president trump. was he there -- mr. spicer: i don't keep his schedule. no identify dee. -- idea. i have my own concerns here keeping track of what everyone's doing. i don't worry about what's going on across the pond. the question's not what. can you tell us he wasn't there on behalf of the white house?
mr. spicer: sure. i don't -- he is not -- this is silly. i really don't think asking where random foreign leaders are and whether or not they are there -- i'm sure he was there doing whatever on behalf -- he's a member of -- i understand that. i don't keep his schedule. reporter: sean, two questions. first, treasury secretary steve mnuchin sent a letter to congress saying that congress should raise the debt ceiling. we know that the budget director, mulvaney, while he was in congress he voted against raising the debt ceiling multiple times. is mulvaney going to support the raising of the debt ceiling? does the president support that? mr. spicer: i think we have a few months to do that. the secretary is making congress very much aware. we got into -- i have been in the white house six weeks. approaching the 50th day here of
this administration. i don't -- i think we're trying to deal with the situation at hand. part of the reason that the president has addressed the budget the way he has is to try to get our nation's deficit and budget in order. i think he's continued to show tremendous respect for taxpayer money. the way we spend money and bring it down. obviously there are certain things that are beyond our control when we walked into this building. we're going to work with secretary mnuchin and director mulvaney to address this issue and work with congress. reporter: question or another cabinet secretary. carbon dioxide was not the primary contributor to global warming. that obviously is at odds with global scientific consensus. does the president agree -- mr. spicer: that's a snippet of what administrator pruitt said. he went on to say don't think we know conclusively. i suggest you touch base with the e.p.a. on that. he has a very lengthy response. that's just one snippet of what the add martor said.
anita. -- administrator said. anita. reporter: i think you mentioned apprehensions were down across the border. there was a question yesterday about the wall. is the wall still needed if apprehensions are down? mr. spicer: i think so, sure. it's not just needed, the president committed to doing it to the american people. i think while we can have a good month and i think we'll see if that continues, that the president made a commitment to the american people to make sure that this isn't just an anomaly. while they may be down we have to do what we can to protect our country both in temples national security and economic security. -- in terms of national security and economic security. it's a commitment the president made. one of the things that the american people regardless of where they stand across the aisle appreciate about this president is he's a man that's kept his word. he talks -- he made commitments to them. he's fulfilling them to make the ountry better.
reporter: you have not -- i think you have been asked this before but been reluctant to say whether president obama and president trump have spoken since the inauguration. although president trump was very forthcoming about that during the transition. though i'm not sure why he would mention t i'm asking it again. there was a report yesterday that said their aides, aides from both presidents have spoken. can you talk to us about either of those things? mr. spicer: i would be glad to foum. i didn't ask the president whether or not had he spoken. i'll be back tomorrow. reporter: can you follow up? mr. spicer: i will. i keep my word, too.
reporter: guantanamo, whether guantanamo will be expanded, whether it continues they transferred out. mr. spicer: i think -- don't have anything to announce with respect to its expansion or its use, expansion use. i think the president has commented on the importance of guantanamo in the past. and the need to main taint people that are there are not people who seek to do anyone good. they are there for a reason. and he has no plans to close it, if that's what you're asking. as far as the future goes in temples expansion, don't have anything to comment on at this ime. reporter: communities across the nation, that's not new. it they recently have been --
inaudible] met with state department officials and also president trump. so it -- mr. spicer: i think with respect to -- you talking about the event in kansas city specifically? i think the president, whether it's the event that happened in kansas city, other events, the attacks on jewish community centers, we saw another report this morning, some unfortunate activity, i think we have got to continue to call tout. we have to continue to root it out. we have to continue to engage law enforcement, whatever the applicable level of law enforcement depending on the event. it's something that i think all americans should be outraged and disgusted by and stand up for the principles that unite us. that's what the president spoke so eloquently about during his
joint address. made it very clear that while certain policies may divide us as individuals, there are certain principle that is can unite us. ohn. reporter: now we have two . sinessmen in indiana inaudible] what is the future under president trump economically trade and bilateral -- mr. spicer: thank you. i think we have talked about during the campaign and transition establishing a deeper relationship with the prime minister and u.s.-india
businesses. i think as we move forward in temples our foreign policy, we'll have further updates on that. but he, as you know very well, he spoke very clearly and frequently about the relationship that we have and hope to continue to grow with india. john. reporter: during the campaign president trump was not shy about his desire to get the united states out of these middle eastern wars. yet there was a question earlier we spent 250 marines into syria. is president trump committed to going to congress to receiving authorization for an aumf or declaration of war if we continue to deploy united states troops overseas? mr. spicer: well, josh, i think there is a big difference between authorization of war and sending a few hundred advisors. i think most in congress would probably agree with that. i think that's a big difference
between a hot flash and going in to address some certain concerns. whether it's concern countries in the middle east or elsewhere. i would refer you to the department of defense on that one. i think the actions that he has done and taken with the advice that his generals have given him is admiral as well. is something we'll continue to work on. reporter: first off clarifying the difference between the campaign stuff and the health care rollout, the nashville will be the campaign stop. how will the white house pick and choose how that goes, whether it's going to be a presidential visit trying to sell the health care rollout or one for the campaign? and a second question. mr. spicer: i think the campaign will make decision was respect to how they want to compend spend their money and where they want to go. and the official -- white house will do the same. i think that's something that every president back as far as
modern history has done as well. the president will be visiting several cities over the next coming weeks to engage the american people on the need to repeal and replace and other steps he's taking to deliver on the promises he's made as commander in chief. reporter: senator cruz had dinner last night. can you character the relationship between the two men? 2018 will be here before you know t -- know it. mr. spicer: i think we got a few battles to get through legislatively. but i know that he enjoyed welcoming senator and mrs. cruz and their two daughters last night to the white house. they had a very enjoyable time and fruitful discussion. but it's something he'll continue to do with members of both parties. both chambers. and not just here in washington. i think you are going to see him engage with governors and attorneys general and lieutenant governors. the president truly enjoys this level of engagement.
he likes to sit down and talk about ideas and get their input. they talked a little business and lot of personal last night. and it was and enjoyable thing. thank you, guys. have a great day. i look forward to seeing you tomorrow. tomorrow will be one question friday. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2017] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org]