tv Budget Committee Votes 19-17 to Report GOP Health Care Bill to House CSPAN March 16, 2017 9:03pm-12:21am EDT
to make sure they have enough votes before they come to the floor. changesdepends on what leadership is a minimal -- amenable to making. like really back medicaid expansion. you have a number of senators would think this for where the medicaid provision currently is. it is a balancing act between getting the parties on the same line that still making sure they passed a bill that the senate would then also passed to get to the president. williams reporting on twitter. thank you for the update. >> the house budget committee voted 19 to 17 to advance the republican plan to repeal and
the concurrent resolution on the budget for the fiscal year 2017. under the congressional budget act of 1974, the budget committee has the role of combining the reconciliation submissions of the committee ways and means, energy, and commerce, and reporting the bill to the house without any substantive or divisions -- revisions. after reporting the measure, the committee will conclude with final motions. markups my capacity -- will be as follows. the ranking member and i make the opening statement. i asked that members insert their statements into the record. i will hold the record open until the end of the day for that purpose. after voting, report the
american health care act of 2017, we will entertain any wrap up motions. it will be a total of 20 minutes of debate evenly divided. the opponent and proponent will be recognized for 10 minutes each with one minute to close. i now recognize the gym and from indiana. >> since we is scheduled to have floor votes later today, asked unanimous the that -- consent that the chairman be authorized to declare recess at any time. without objection, so ordered. we will now move to opening statements. tohout objection, i asked
insert extraneous comments into the record. good morning. we are here today to act on the american health care act. this bill seeks to address one of the fundamental policy challenges that we face. how to reduce the cost of health care and give all americans access to quality care. this is something the house republicans have talked about for years, and opportunity is finally here to fill the promise that we have made to the american people. under the leadership of seeger rhine, this body began to form life and approach -- of speaker form anis body began to outline and approach. we need to take control of health care decisions away from the government and give it back to the patients and doctors. we need to reduce costs and make sure everyone has access to quality care. and, we need to reform and allow states to reform government
programs like medicaid to strengthen them and make sure they are intended for people they are meant to help. that is what i bill does. the american health care act provides monthly, portable tax credits, not tied to a job or of why she did -- in washington mandated program. reducinglower costs by competition and choice. this plan also allows for more options by allowing individuals and families to buy the insurance plan that they need and want added -- at a price they can afford. of theot the job government to tell americans what plan they should purchase. it ensures that the individuals and families can spend an eva
health or dollars the way they want. the american health care act is also a once in a generation entitlement reform. medicaid spending is growing out of control. modernizeseforms and medicaid for the 21st century. reforming the program and giving states greater flexibility to make the program fit the needs theer citizens will protect program and make sure it is available for the populations intended to serve. face all, the issues that california are very different from the issues that face my state of tennessee. in total, this will reduce the -- reduces the deficit over 10 years and reduces taxes by $880 billion for individuals and small business owners. at this time, premiums will
decrease. this is the vision for free healthpatient centered care. inputs health care decisions where ithe hands belongs. this is the conservative health care vision we have been talking about for 10 years. to my republican colleagues who doubtsealt to date, -- today, i encourage you, stay in the discussion. thisrs who desire to read bill approved have every right to make their voices heard.
right now, obamacare is imploding. we were promised premiums that would decrease, but instead, average family premiums soared by $4300. we were promised health-care costs would go down. instead, deductibles have skyrocketed. we were promised it -- promised we could keep our doctors and health care plans. and that, millions of americans have lost the doctors that they like. in short, the affordable care act was neither affordable nor did it provide the care that americans deserved. thane been under for more 45 years. i saw the impact in the 1990's from a government run ok or system -- government run single-payer system.
rise andse -- costs care fall. it is what inspired me to get involved in the first place. when i saw the same broken principles here, i felt compelled to bring my voice and .xperience here premiums in my state have increased over 60%. there are parts of tennessee that do not have a single insurance provider in the marketplace, while other places , people have an insurance card, but cannot get care. jenny, president of my diss , reached outrict to say that her premium increased per month.
i wrote her saying, health insurance should not cost the same as a mortgage payment. george in my district reached out to my office to say this will be the first year since he was very young that he will not be able to afford health insurance. before obamacare, he would think $458 per month for health insurance. this year, his insurance is a 1000 $600 per month. recent town hall, where constituents on the 70% of peoplean said that obamacare had a on health care. these are the reasons that i'm drawn to public service in the
first place. we have a chance to truly fix the problems. this opportunity pass. we made a promise to the people to replace this. that americans can have the insurance they once at the price they can afford. this bill is a good first step. my good friend and chairman of committee, dr. tom price, has already started the process of rolling back the burdens injured by obamacare. willprocess continue. at the same time, i look forward to future legislation that addresses issues that cannot be included in this bill.
will pieces of legislation create a more robust marketplace for all americans. already, my colleagues on the judicial committee and the workforce committee are working on separate pieces of legislation that will implement significant medical malpractice reforms and allow small come together. this is the three-pronged approach. the american health care act is a strong first step in this process. it ensures key victories to lower costs and put patients that in charge of their health care decisions. in accordance with the 1974
act --sional health care thank the committee for drafting this effort, and i look forward to today's markup. i encourage all on both sides of the aisle to work with us to pass piece of legislation and bring relief to the american people. thank you. with that, i yield to the .anking member republican spin being unreliable. the fact is that this cuts
hundreds of millions of dollars from medicare. the cuts grow larger every year. deeper and deeper every year after that. we cannot cut medicaid that severely without genetically cutting coverage and care. it is parent struggling to get .y let's be honest. this is not a health or bill. it is an ideological document about freedom and choice and a market that does not exist. what is real about this bill is it is painfully real. theives cuts, paid for in worst way, jeopardizing the health of american families. it gives tax cuts to the rich with devastating consequences
families all across the country. this is robin would -- robin hood in reverse, but far worse. because brian wants to talk about giving people the freedom and choice about having health insurance or not. -- thatth insurance would work if young people also had the freedom to choose whether to have cancer or not, or get in an accident or not, which they obviously don't. that does not. speaker ryan from pretending this bill will create a magical health care free market that exists nowhere in the world. it is a fantasy land where no one gets sick and they do not get old either, so they don't have to worry about getting priced out of the market, as this one does. that is nonsense. says the number of people
without insurance will nearly double. i think that is all you need to know if you are wondering why this bill is being rushed to the floor. remember, it was introduced last monday, rked up in the commerce and ways and means committee two days later. now, it will be on the health or as soon as republican leadership can get it there. there have been no congressional hearings on this decision. not a single hearing on the legislation that impacts the health care of every american family. if i were them, i would not want to talk about this bill either. i certainly would not want to defend it. the american people deserve to know what is in it, so let's run through the facts. 14 million americans will lose coverage next year. that number rises to 24 million people by 2026. in fact, a rises to 21 million by 2020. consider that.
in just three years, the entire gains by the affordable care act will be wiped out. these people will live in click -- live in fear that they are always one accident from bankruptcy. the nonpartisan office estimates 50% premiums will jump by in 2018 and 2019. by the end of the decade, premiums will be 10% less than current law, but the reason for that drop is largely because older people will be priced out of the market, which i hope no one will want to brag about. 60-year-old a for the premium, $1700. $40,000.ockets to
for pretty much everyone in the market, other costs including deductibles will be higher. will also be costs higher. this unlimited the requirement that insurers provide policies certain actuate values which means they can have much less financial protection. plus, it takes money from the medicare trust fund. it does all of that, cutting coverage for americans, and reducing coverage for millions more to give millionaires of $50,000 tax cut every year and a $144 tax cut to companies and a tax cut to the pharmaceutical industry. and, as special tax cut to
health care executives who often make a million dollars or more per year. trump repeatedly said that the republican replacement bill would preserve existing coverage, everyone would have coverage, it would be less expensive, and better, it was going to be great. he also promised that medicare and medicaid would not be cut. none of that is in this hill. in fact, the exact opposite is what is in this ill. secretary of health and human price stated that more people would be covered that are covered right now and no one would be worst off the now. not true. no one was going to be worse off. wrong.
cathy mcmorris rodgers pledge no one who has coverage because of obamacare today would bruise lose that coverage. wronagain. will not find any of those promises in this bill. let's remember, this bill is the first step for the republican strategy, a strategy they have publicly stated is to take away the affordable care act guarantees that services like maternity care, mental health would be covered. ultimately, this will, future legislation, and expected regulation will put companies back in charge allowing them to decide what to get who lives and dies. i strongly oppose this bill, and i'm not alone in this
opposition. it is opposed by america's hospitals, doctors, the aarp, the american cancer society, the diabetes association, the diabetes network, governors from both sides of the aisle and more and more of a colleague in the house. this bill is not what the american people want. they have made that clear by showing up by the thousands across the country. we can afford the affordable care act, and we should. i urge my colleagues to vote no on this bill and work with us to ensure that every family has access to quality, affordable health care. the american people deserve no less. i yield back. rep. black: thank you. following our practice, i ask unanimous can that that members have until the end of the day to submit their statements to the record. without objection, so ordered. proceed with
reporting the american health care act of 2017 to the house. motions will come after the conclusion of the vote on the procedure. i ask unanimous can that the week reading be dispensed with. amend the: motions to bill will not be entertained. i will now recognize the german from indiana, mr. rokita -- gentleman from indiana, mr. rokita.
rep. rokita: thank you. rep. black: the question is on ordering the health care bill of 2017 to be reported favorably to the house. all those in favor, report by saying aye. no.e opposed, say, in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the clerk will call the roll. aye.r. akita, aye. mr. cole. mr. mcclintock, aye. mr. woodall, aye. mr. sanford. aye.omack, mr. brett, no.
mr. jeffries, no. mr. higgins, no. this wasserman schultz -- m s lobsterme wasserman schultz, no. carbajal, no. ms. jackson lee, no. madame chairman, aye. rep. black: are there any members who have not voted or vote?o change their >> mr. cole, aye. rep. black: are there any other members who have not voted over like to change their vote?
the gentleman votes no. >> mr. sanford, no. rep. black: if not, the clerk shall report. ayes have it and the motion is agreed to. it will be reported to the house of representatives with a favorable recognition. >> i asked the requisite number of days for the minority to file its views. rep. black: so ordered. rep. rokita: madame chairman, i ask unanimous consent that on the measure reported staff be allowed to make any technical or necessary corrections before filing the bill, such as filing the short title of the bill and that the chair be authorized to ,uthorized motions on the bill
or any companion measure from the senate. rep. black: without objection, so ordered. with the help having been favorably reported to the house, i ask unanimous can then that the committee follow it long-standing custom of this committee and entertained the motions in the order of the agreed-upon list made available to the members. debate on these motions will be limited to 20 minutes each, equally divided with one minute research -- reserved for the proponent to close. the opponent and the proponent will be able to control their time. without objection, so ordered. i would also like to remind members that these motions do not amend the bill and are not binding on the rules committee. complete the consideration of the megan health care act of 2017. that completes the consideration of the american health care act of 20 the team.
2017. i now recognize mr. boyle for the purpose of emotion. the clerk will read the motion. >> the motion offered by representatives boyle and jeffries. mr. boyle and mr. jeffries move that he committee of the budget direct the chairman to address the for consideration of the american health care act make in order that would visit any provision of the bill from
taking effect until the secretary of health and human services certifies that its amendmentesult in no increase of the number of individuals with insurance, and two, more care and three, better health insurance as measured by improved health insurance benefits. thank you, madam chairman. this motion supports an amendment to the bill that would prevent any provision of the american health care act from being implemented until the secretary of hhs certifies that if the phils the promises made by president trump to the american people. the president has, there would be no increase in the number of individuals without health insurance, that health care would become more affordable with lower out of cost -- out-of-pocket costs, and the quality would be better. just january, the present that,
we will have insurance for everybody and people can expect to have great health and he is against the motions that -- the notion that "if you do not pay for it, you don't get it ." the american people deserve tothe -- to know specifically how our system has improved by from 20nsurance away million americans and shoveling next billion dollars in tax cuts wealthiest of americans, which $361arly twice as much as billion this provides assistance that americans need. the president has ensured us that we will have insurance for everybody, much less expensive,
and much better. requests an an individual why 14,000e forced to pay 2026 -- n premiums by how is it less expensive and much better? i yield to mr. jeffries. jeffries: donald trump made three promises to the american people about health care. one, everyone will be covered, too, it will be more affordable, and three, it would be much better. threecare breaks all promises. it is a fraud, a sham, a charade. a hollywood style production that will destroy health care in
america. first, trump care what directly lead to millions of americans losing their insurance. according to the cbo, within the next year, 14 million additional americans will be without health care coverage. within the next 10 years, 24 million hard-working americans will lose health insurance altogether. the president assured americans that affordability will not be the reason they lose their care takeset, trump dead aim at the poor, the sick, and elderly. cbo estimates 14 million people will lose access medicaid in the next 10 years. estimates thatte earle under 49 -- that less than $49,000 wille ic as likely to be uninsured under
this bill. trump care also guaranteed an increase in out-of-pocket costs. yet again, trump care falls short. force the gop plan will families into plans with higher deductibles and they will ofr more of the costs premiums. rising costs will hit older americans, low-income families, and people living in rural areas especially hard. third, trump care will automatically reduced the quality of health insurance. and almost $9 billion cut for -- reduce benefits for low-income families.
it will be especially harmful andseniors in nursing homes children with disabilities who rely on medicaid. this bill will also allow insurers to provide plans with significantly less protection, exposing enrollees to greater financial risks. insurers will take advantage of this to design plans for people who do not need much medical care. mthew,5: 35of says, "for i was hungry, you gave me something to eat, i was thirsty, you gave me something to drink, i was a stranger, and you took me in, i was naked, you me, i was sick, you looked after me." trump care fails on all scores. i yield back.
mr. boyle: thank you. i now yield one minute to mr. lla yarmouth. thank you for yielding. to elaborate on what has been that, one of the key elements of this proposal is the guarantees of the coverage that we provided in the affordable care act. as i stated in my opening allowent, this bill would insurance companies to sell coverage without mental health coverage, despite the fact that we have an opiate and drug addiction problem in this country, it would allow companies to reduce the actuary values. a greater portion of the out-of-pocket care would be the responsibility of the insured, and not the insurance company.
and, increasing exposure of the people covered by these policies. again, another broken promise that the president made, including, i make engine, he did make the not touch health care. financiales the viability by three years. i feel that. mr. boyle: i yield to mr. moulton. to thank my i want colleagues from unzipping a for yielding his time. secretary price said that the house republican plan would leave no one worse off financially, no one worse off. tell that to the 14 million americans who will not have access to health care next year
because of this bill. tell that to the 16 million seniors and individuals with disabilities who will pay drastically more for health care next year because of this bill. tell that to the 3 million veterans who will lose their health care coverage because of this will. thank you for your service. but, you will be a lot worse off. do not take it from me, let's be the report. the report says, caught payments, including deductibles would tend to be higher than those anticipated under the current law. once again, the american people are being told alternative facts by trump and his administration. thank you, and i yield back. mr. boyle: thank you. for youryou
leadership. as you pointed out, the president promised three things. more coverage, better benefits, and lower costs. how was he going to do it? wrote, the canadian style single-payer system where all payments are paid to a single agency help canadians live longer and healthier than americans. what he ought to do is work with vendors and is for medicare for all if he is serious about living up to the commitment he has made. i yield back i time. mr. boyle: thank you. i heals one minute to miss jackson lee. lee: let me take note of the speakers comment to ensure that we know we are not speaking about the health care bill for the reasons that this
amendment is so important. that weryan indicated are talking about trillions in the end is program, hundreds of billions a year throughout the country. is it so much bigger by orders of magnitude and reform. think about what you are doing to medicaid. this is a bust medicaid bill. it is not a health care bill. it ignores completely be response that is given to the mecca people by the president that everyone has insurance. people under the law can expect to have great health care. that is not the case. i asked opposition to the bill in support of the amendment. ideal back. rep. black: now, i would like to recognize mr. mcclintock for 10
minutes. mr. mcclintock: thank you. mr. boyles and mr. jeffries raise a good point regarding the structure of the tax credit, in particular. i will address that in my amendment 11. amendmentity of the is illustrated in the cbo's report. they entitled the report, anti-surrounding the amendments. how the lawpredict would actually be indicated. i distinctly remember president obama certifying to the nation that we see an average of $25,000 drop health care system. premiums arerage of 25% last year with bigger
increases expected. i distantly remember president obama certifying to the nation that if you like your plan, you can keep your plan. in fact, millions of americans lost their plans and were forced onto the obamacare exchanges. one third of our counties have no choice at all. there is only one provider and in another third, only two providers. i distinctly remember this abo -- the cbo certified that 20 million americans would enroll in obamacare by 2017, and only 11 million people did. it was famously said, predictions are difficult, if ashley when they involve the future. the fact is, interventions in the marketplace create a wide variety of unintended, and often, perverse consequences. we are now dealing with the wreckage of such intervention. we know for a fact it has not
worked well for a number of americans. it has denied them the choices that a free market provides. costt has sent taxpayer spiraling. no one contends it is a perfect plan. it is not even a complete plan. i wish we were sending a reform that completely replaces obamacare with a vibrant consumer market. relies on, this administrative rules and follow-up legislation to finish the work. that is the number -- another of the limitations of the clairvoyance. i believe, when all of the measures are permitted, can immerse will have the widest range of choices to select the plan that best meet their needs in an environment where
consumers are tripping over each other. certainty? of course not. it is more likely to control costs and ensure accessibility and promote innovation and excellence that the current system. that, i believe, is a reasonable expectation. of, i yield to mr. lewis minnesota. mr. lewis: there is a lot of ta today about broken promises. the poster child of broken promises has been the affordable care act. i can tell you about what happened in minnesota. governor dayton said, the informal care act is no longer affordable. when blue cross blue shield
dropped out, minnesotans with left without a plan. this is a debacle. every american in minnesota knows it is a debacle. the state of minnesota had to legislation just to stay in the exchange. that is the crisis we are in. be ao address this would derelict of not only our promises, but our duty as the body. mcclintock: i now yield to my colleague of new york. >> i appreciate the motion made by my colleagues on the other side. unfortunately, this motion is just an aspirational proposal. it does not offer any specifics.
it offers what they like and wish. it is typical washington. people are sick and tired of what washington does, which is often nothing. we have a situation around is where yes, many people are happy many more arebut seeing increases in premiums, deductibles, they can no longer afford it. they may have insurance in some instances, but they no longer have something that is affordable. motion on the the other side is just washington speak. it does not make a suggestion as to what the chair would do if she were on the rules committee, if you wanted to change the tax credit. one of the great things about the slope of orris is we are
the tax to equalize treatment for those. it is not tax to them. the $45,000 household with husband and wife, you know tax present -- preference at all if your employer does not provide insurance. why are you not suggesting to the chair that you address that to the rules committee? as you offer a press release the motion. this is typical washington speak that does not advance the process, that does not change anything, it is just looking to score political points, it is not looking to fix anything. frankly, my friends, we have to figure the best that the aca has
created. that is what we're trying to do. as mr. mcclintock said, this is not all planned, but a first step on making a full plan to replace it. i yield back. m mr. mcclintock: i yield to my colleague of wisconsin. >> in 30% of the counties, there is only one plan left. if we wait another year, i don't know how many counties there would be no plan at all. when you have so little it is notn, surprising that premiums are going got by 25% this year. i suppose there may be the, some commentators, who say we ma shod wait a year. if we wait a year, we would be what type of premium increase you have we have no competition
at all. nevertheless, we are going forward with this bill today. the goal of the bill is to bring more free market competition into the health care market and what we need more than anything else, overall health care costs drop you a there doing a great job containing their health care costs. they are doing it because they are not. in an obamacare monopoly situation. there's no reason why health care costs in this country should not fall. you can look at health care procedures that are not covered by insurance and, just like everythi else driven by ,echnology, things like lasik cosmetic surgery, are falling. , think the private sector areugh a variety of needs causing their employees to have
health care costs go well below the increases we are thing with obamacare. again, i think people have to remember what a train wreck obamacare is at this time and even more what a wreck it could be if we wait a year to see if that he what happens when the government takes over this meant of the economy. i conclude that the reason the cbo notes and additional drop off in present -- in premiums is because they believe the vast majority of people who purchased the programs are because they are forced to buy them. the republican vision has always been one of a vibrant and competitive market where consumers have the widest possible range of choices and supportive tax code to ensure that every person has basic
coverage within the financial reach. i yield back. rep. black: mr. boyle, the proponent of the motion, is recognized for one minute to close. mr. boyle: i have to give the designers of trump care credit as this will is somehow more damaging to working americans been a straightforward repeal of the eith ea would have been. according to the nonpartisan congressional office, premiums will grow 29% in just two years. 52 million americans will be uninsured with an 10 years. be drainedn will from the trust fund and a number of americans covered in the employer-provided market will fall by 7 million. all of the evidence of just -- suggests this bill will worsen every aspect of our health care
system and return us to a time before the eighth day when coverage was knighted acceptable nor affordable. thank you, madam chair. rep. black: the question is a agreement on the motion put forward by mr. boyle. in the opinion of the chair, the no has it. a rollcall vote has been requested. no -- mr. ta, rokita, no. mr. cole, no. mr. mcclintock, no. mr. woodall, no. mr. sanford, no. mack, no.not -- wo grossman, no. mr. palmer, no.
emotion. i want to remind you there are nine minutes on the clock and then you will get one minute to close. >> i have a motion at the desk. rep. black: the clerk will read the motion. mr. higgins and mr. address before the committee to make in order and amendment that would want strikes all elements in the bill coverage,e the increased costs and benefits, -- two, strike rep. black: mr. higgins is recognized. you, madam: thank
chair. yesterday, president trump we are involved in a big, fat, beautiful negotiation. that we are negotiating with everybody regarding health care. no, you not, mr. president. you, houseelonged to republicans, and the insurance companies exclusively. this bill is a scam being perpetrated on and against the american people. are 50 to 64 years old, you get clobbered. in fact, according to the congressional office, if you are 64, you make $26,000 per year, your health insurance bill will increase under your plan by more than $12,000. $14,000.0 a year to by the way, i would remind my colleagues, you should know, the
white house scored this bill as well. there is a reason why do not know about that. fat ofget to the big and the present characterization. united health care is one of the largest health care providers in america, private insurance company. their ceo, in 2004, with cap and they did with $66 million. he actually took a pay cut inause he made $102 million 2010. there is a provision in this bill -- rep. black: bill -- that says insurance companies can claim compensation as a business expense for reduction from taxes. ago, the department of justice opened up an
investigation on united health care for overbilling the tens of program not by thousands of dollars, or millions of dollars, but i billions of dollars. you will vote this is the tax cut to >> this is morally reprehensible. i now yield three minutes. >> thank you, mr. higgins. the cbo report shows that the .umbers here just don't add up you can't say you're going to save a trillion dollars in the lessit and give folks subsidy than they are getting under the affordable care act and still claim that people are not going to lose of their insurance. my concern and the reason i brought this motion with mr.
higgins is let's be honest about what is going on. if you want to give people less funding to five of cities -- to buy subsidies because you think it will lower part of the deficit, is say you don't care about lower income families getting insurance. it is more important to give tax cuts to grow the economy, this is going to help the deficit. pretend, let's have a philosophical debate against -- about the issues. do we care about expanding coverage and is it worth that cost to a society are doing care more -- or do we care more about reducing costs and taking money away? we are not debating the facts.
i yield back the balance of my time. >> i now yield one minute to mislead. lee. miss >> i'm a strong supporter of this motion. 's will make sure no american thiss to health care -- bill will assault family the just struggling to make ends meet. it rips health care away from 24 million americans. this is not a health care plan. or the massive tax cut wealthy disguise as a health care plan. this bill is a $600 billion tax giveaway which is the largt transf of wealth from working families to rich in our nations history.
americans will suffer just so my republican colleagues can hand wealthiest families in america a $800 million tax rate each year. -- tax break each year. -- they use medicare as a piggy bank to pay for these enormous tax cuts. it is really a disgrace. >> a couple of days i received a call from a marine i served with it was suffering with addiction and needed help. i would like to tell some of my republican colleagues who want to vote for this legislation to take that call and explain why that call -- that health is not going to be here next year for him. values, it isour about what is right and wrong
with health care in america today. under the republican proposal, it is right for the rich to get better health care, for the poor to continue being sick. it is right for the sons and daughters of the richest americans at to be well cared for while the sons and daughters of our veterans are left sick. this is about our values. and i think we collectively are failing to meet that test. i now yield back. >> i yield one minute to mr. boyle. there is a terrible irony about this trumpcare bill. we just went through an election in which a blue-collar families like the one i was born in , which spent 20 or 30
years standing still were finally looking for something different. we're sick and tired of being ignored by washington, d.c. you have a populist uprising around the world after 30 years of stagnant incomes. tot do our friends do finally take care of them, they offer us a bill think is a record tax cut--that is a record tax cut. if you are a ceo of a health insurance company, who on average makes about 13 million dollars a year, you'll get an aggregate of a $400 million tax break. some populism. i yield back. you, mr. higgins for your leadership to prevent this unprecedented shift of wealth
from working people to billionaires and corporations. that this pay more for less bill is a not a health care bill, it is a tax billiont gives a $600 tax-cut to the wealthiest and is paid for on the backs of poor and middle-class household. the one principle that seems to be consistent in this bill is the richer you are, the bigger your tax cut. the top 4% of income earners that get big hundred million dollars a year will get about $200 deficit $200,000 a year each. chairman this is america, we do -- this bill is to agreed. while 24get richer million people are stripped of health care. i yield back. i now recognize as the
opponent of the motion mr. smith from missouri for 10 minutes. >> thank you, chairman black. i clearly oppose this motion because it is our responsibility to limit the size and scope of the federal government and that is what this will does. we musadvance of this conservative solution to control spending and save our country from economic despair. when the folks on the other side of the aisle talk about taking away from the poor, you are talking about taking away from the people i represent. i know the working poor, i know what the lower middle class looks like because i represented the 14th most economically dressed congressional district ressed congressional district in the country. in my district the median house
income is right at $40,000 a year. people live the below the poverty line. estimates, less of than 3.4% of the people in my congressional district enrolled in obamacare. through healthcare.gov. people less than 26,000 in south east and south central missouri. those people, the 3.4% were forced to participate in obamacare and and 26 of the 30 counties we have in our congressional district, how many choices it did they have? one choice. i will tell you what obamacare gave us, obamacare gave us in southeastern missouri very few
options. it took away our doctors. president obama promised we did keep our doctors, we lost our doctors. and he promised we can keep our millionare plan, 4.7 people loss of their health care plan under obamacare. freedom but obamacare gave us tax increases onhe poor d middlelass. obamacare tax wheelchairs so don't stand there on that side of the aisle and they that poor people don't use will years. use wheel chairs. obamacare tax the middle class. pointn say you're talking
but if you are telling me the poor don't use medical equipment, you are wrong. you tax that. and you tax drug and numerous item this builder feels over $800 billion worth of taxes you all put. -- as you know what this bill 800 billionealed worth of taxes you all voted for. we are not raising their taxes, we are giving them more options by stabilizing the market. our bill does not cut the middle class like obamacare. because 800 billion in taxes that they face because of obamacare. cbs said that after we restore the freedom for people to buy health insurance if they want it, 14 million people will
choose not to buy it. it will be their choice once again, no longer a mandate in washington dc. i would like to yield 20 minutes to mr. grossman. >> a problem i have with this motion is that i think it is fundamentally dishonest about who is paying for this plan and who is getting the benefits of his plan. it falls back on the rhetoric that we are benefiting the rich. we continue,n perhaps some more than some of us like a generous medicaid program and we have refundable is credits. really what it is a gift to the government towards your health insurance.
where does the money come from the tax credits and medicaid? some mr. big apology for the rich. later this session we are to .alk about tax reform we have to be honest here. the top 3% of the tax returns pay for 50% of our government right now which is to say the top 3% are going to pay for the top 3%redits, are going to pay for the the generous medicaid program. on the other hand he can be a married couple and have kids and make $40,000 a year d pay no our tax credits are phasing out when you begin to make $75,000 a year.
there are a lot of working middle-class families making 75 grand a year and their benefits is going to be phased out. 100,they get up from 90, $120,000, they are not going to be in it at all. with this plan you are purely wealthy paying for the benefits and people without much money will be getting something without taking anything in. to say something otherwise is fundamentally dishonest. plans, like many something in which you don't have to work at all to get these tax credits so that is not the wealthy. you don't have to make money at all to get these tax credits and if you are a single person year, 120, 130 grand a
you're paying for these benefits as not getting any benefit that. -- back. the wealthye having get some big benefits out of the medical system and we are taking advantage of the so-called core, it is the exact opposite of what is going on. is the exactpoor opposite. >> i appreciate the gentleman to yield a time for me to speak on this motion. it is fitting we are here today discussing concerns with health care calls that would reduce the number of americans with health insurance. a policy that would raise costs for americans, a policy that could digitally reduce that if it in any way. congress discussed of these concerns back when obamacare was being can entered, maybe we would not be here today,
obamacare, the very legislation that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle supported has -- has costs, reduced led to be taxpayer on the hook for this unsustainable health care law. we as the narrow insurance markets and most recently states with only one insurer in their marketplace. americans have found health-care options under obamacare to be so unappealing and unaffordable that instead of purchasing coverage they had chosen to pay the individual mandate penalty. 2016ding to the irs, in roughly 6.5 million americans paid 3 billion for the penalty -- and thatillion
is roughly 20 million people who decided obamacare is not worth the trouble or the price. that is less choice, less freedom for americans across the country than for the people in my home state of michigan who work hard and want the freedom to choose what is best for themselves and their families. individual freedoms are the very foundation of our country. i encourage my colleagues to vote against this motion. >> i yield a minute to mr. arrington. 25% increase in premiums and $4300 in increased to deductibles across the country is not a tax on the middle class i don't know what is. andme from a rural america the districts like mine are middle-class and working class vote, small businesses, family farmers, main street americans.
obamacare regulations are crushing our hospital. how are our farmers and ranchers would defeat and close the american people -- feed and c lothe the american people? >> i yield back. the republican led congressional budget office has estimated the first year loss of those with health insurance will be 14 million. the white house warned that they score they will not share with you is about 17 million. insurance companies are making record profits and will make a more under your bill. when they need help care for them and their families, they want to ensure it is there without deductibles and
surcharges and all these added costs. we have an opportunity to develop a plan that really works for the american people. this proposal is not it. i yield back. >> to the motion offered by mr. higgins, all those in favor signify by saying aye. it.he no's have a clerk will call the role. >> mr. akita, no. >> mr. cole, no. >> mr. mcclintock, no. >> mr. woodall, no. >> mr. sanford, no. >> mr. womack, no. >> mr. brett, no. >> mr. grossman, no. >> mr. palmer, no.
the committee on the budget have its chairman make an amendment that would want strike language in the bill that would one in strikeicaid expansion, new tax breaks for the wealthy and corporations in the bill. -- miss jipole is recognized. a planre here to fulfill that is a betrayal of the american people. how is this a betrayal? tweetou cynically struck 4 million people of health care and double the number of uninsured in the country from 28,000,002 52 million is a betrayal. whenou undermine the health for millions of
americans struggling to get by on poverty level wages and people too disabled to work, that is a betrayal. last night i listened to secretary tom price tried to counter angry rural doctors, retired teachers and cancer survivors who know this bill is a betrayal and when asked if he could promise no if the-64-year-old would see their cost increase, secretary price could not answer. this motion would turn back the misguided attempt to strip $880 billion from medicaid for 14 million americans in 31 states across the country. even republican governors from states like michigan, ohio and nevada agreed that medicaid expansion has been a huge benefit for real people in their state. of washingtonte medicaid expansion has helped over 600,000 people and cut the number of uninsured in half.
cutting medicaid hurts people suffering from opioid abuse and who are now getting treatment. telling states that you are left holding the bag and in this case body bags for the millions of people who suffer life and death consequences. i now yield three minutes to make jacksonlee. i am delighted to co-author this amendment that really they really saves lives. the mess my colleagues talk of lives,he mess hard-working americans.
who is being devastated by the loss of $800 billion from medicaid. arkansasthe lady in and by the way i noticed that there is no one here on this committee from kentucky but the lady from arkansas who asked i was looking to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle. you are on the right side of the issue, thank you. this lady posed the question to senator cotton, my husband who work, who struggled is suffering ,rom congestive heart failure open surgeries, dementia, alzheimer's, they had insurance. obamacare, $39er for this hard-working woman.
she invited the senator to her home. important because this bill is paid more for less. more than aing devolution and an ending of medicare. the speaker of the house said that is why i'm so excited about it. we are the federalizing entitlements, granting it back to the states and capping the growth. that is never been done before. medicaid,lowing up you are throwing people into the streets and where is the good samaritan? this bill will impact negatively 31 date to have banded medicaid, that have been able to help. it will give a huge tax cuts to pharmaceutical companies at $25 billion. it is the greatest transfer of and itto the richest 1% is the opportunity for the
nursing home resident of my constituent who because she has no health care did not take her medicine and because she did not take her medicine she is now in a nursing home with a stroke where she is without her faculties and heart disease. the medicaid of obamacare pays is,her and so my conclusion 73 million people in america get their insurance from medicaid. you are killing it and the denying it. taking away the lifeline. i asked my colleague to support the amendment. i yield back. >> i now yield to the representative from mexico. >> thank you to my colleagues from washington. that $880ng in
billion out of medicaid not only destroys families but it destroyed economies. our republican governor expanded medicaid. we had one of the highest uninsured rate in the country. now we are seeing our uninsured rate hovering right about 10-11%. jobs,e lost 7700 mining and a third of our oil rigs have left. act means affordable care cost of 6100 jobs, we have the worst unemployment rate in the country. representsillion people in new mexico getting health care. it is nearly half our population. it's a devastates rural and frontiers dates and makes of them less important in this
debate. with that i yield back. -- i now yield one minute to mr. jeffries from new york. >> this bill is a direct attack on the sick, the poor and the elderly. republicans are cutting taxes and to jamming of working families by devastating medicaid. trumpcare is not a health care bill, it is a giveaway to the rich. this bill provides a $275 billion tax cut to millionaires and billionaires. $240 billion get a tax-cut. the top honors in this country will get an annual tax cut of $700 billion per year. -- million per year. bear a said it is like
deja vu all over again. >> i now yield one minute to mr. higgins. >> thank you, madam chair. again when you look at health medicare program, the medicaid program, with the v.a., you have about 159 million , the federal government needs to view himself as a major purchaser of health care and use of the leverage of those numbers to drive down the cost of health care and prescription drugs in particular. 64t age group between 50 and gets a major hit in this bill. allow them to >> thank you. this bill would absolutely decimate t medicaid program,
ripping away health carerom 600,000 people in my state of washington. and in my district alone, medicaid expansion has meant 36,000 more people are covered. that is 36,000 people who will not go bankrupt because they got sick. affordable coverage is not health care, it is a false promise. make no mistake, the 36,000 people in my district will still , ad health care like katie constituent who had coverage for maternity care thanks to medicaid expansion. her daughter was born healthy and happy, but she told me that she could not imagine what you would have done without medicaid. let's not go backwards. support this motion. i feel back. >> i yield back. >> i recommend the opponent of the motion for 10 minutes. >> thank you, madam chair.
the motion forward by my credit colleagues is don't destroy medicaid and take away health care from the most vulnerable. really? i had to read the motion three times and i can't believe it is being offered. take away care from the most vulnerable? them chairman, thanks to affordable care act, the destruction of medicaid for those who need it most is already occurring. a study by the urban institute put forward data saying 82% that would be newly eligible for medicaid under obamacare would not have a child in the household. not only that, of idiot 2%, 69% woulbe men and women aged 19-44. that is what many would could see that conceit are the best working years of a person's life.
medicaid expansion states have seen federal medicaid dollars increased for working aged, able-bodied adults anywhere from to those who% more qualified before obamacare, including seniors and those with disabilities. is a grossancy injustice to the people that medicaid was originally designed to protect, the elderly, blind and disabled. madam chairman, in my home state of arkansas, the kaiser family foundation reports that there people on a waiting list for a medicaid services waiver. the story is the same across the country. in texas, 116,000. florida, 21,000. and on and on00
nationwide, hundreds of thousands of people with disabilities and the elderly are being penalized and punish through no fault of their own because on march 21, 2010, this house, led by many who are here today, made a conscious decision to increase enrollment for young, able-bodied adults into a program that was intended to help the truly needy, the elderly and disabled. my state took the medicaid expansion eared -- expansion. affected isamilies that of skyler. she was born with a rare condition. her mother said she feared her daughter would not live long enough to receive the assistance she has been waiting on nearly her entire life.
skyler's condition caused her to have multiple seizures per day and her mother is her full-time caretaker. themamily and many like cannot just call up a babysitter if they need to step away. a medicaid waiver would help pay for that. under obamacare, we have seen medicaid rolls increased by millions of people, spending increased by billions of dollars, but unfortunately, it has caused the needs of disabled people like scholars to the put on the back burner in the name of insurance coverage, not health care. madam chairman, i find it appalling that the needs of the truly needy are being ignored to protect a political legacy. i think it is well past time that we stand together and say no more. return thewe medicaid program back to the purchase for which it was created to much to help the elderly and disabled. to join melleagues
in untying the hands of our nation's governors so they have the ability to take the federally provided money through medicaid dollars and assist their citizens the best way they know how. i urge my colleagues on both sides of the isle to stand for those who truly need our help and oppose this amendment. i would like to recognize mr. kita. >> as the federal government has opposed -- imposed more and more regulations and red tape and states have cut health care providers, more people have less access to quality care. medicaid recipients frequently have a hard time finding a doctor and often encounter long wait times to see the few doctors that will accept medicaid in its current form. something has to be done. recipients also frequently receive inferior treatment, have less skilled surgeons, research
-- receive poor instructions and suffer outcomes worse than people on private coverage. a study found that medicaid enrollees have longer hospital stays and were charged more for visits than uninsured patients insurance. private uninsured patients have shorter hospital stays than those who are forced to take this broken medicaid system and promise. the american health care act puts medicaid on a budget. it is not cut medicaid, funding will continue and will continue to grow to match the needs of the states. that it no longer, under this who, would reward states don't treat their providers well or otherwise want to game system. almost $20 trillion in debt, this is the responsible thing to do, to care for the most vulnerable, to provide the proper safety net without a begin makingalso
sure that the next generation isn't the first generation in american history that will be worse off than the current one. it has never been done before. members on this committee should not allow this to happen. this is the right way forward. please deny this motion did i yield to the german. -- i yield for three and a quarter minutes. as members of the house dget committee, i think most of us would agree that our priority is to establish and enfoe control over oubudget. today, as members of this committee, we are given an opportunity to do just that in the realm of health care. i am not debating the life-saving health care services that medicaid provides to a vulnerable population, we cannot ignore the direction the medicaid program is ticking. my friends on the other side of the our claim that by phasing out medicaid expansion, we are
stripping coverage from the most vulnerable. i also heard the word to trail. i believe the -- the word betrayal. i believe the contrary is true. strolling -- slowly stripping why prospects for our children and grandchildren. we are on an unsustainable path. we cannot keep spending money we do not have. if we sit and do nothing and its current rate, medicaid spending 2025.each $957 billion by unsustainable. that is the betrayal. what we are viewing today takes the first of in modernizing our outdated medicaid that has made it impossible for states to manage their budgets. we are strengthening our medicaid program for the future. through the american health care act, states will have greater
flexibility to introduce flexible ways to curb costs. statestion, they empower with $100 billion to further assist states to cover low-incomeopulations, by making these commonsense refor we will finally be able to bend the cost curve that has crippled our budget for too long. if you have not already got it, my point is that we are on an unsustainable path. areess than 10 years, we going to be looking at a $1 trillion spending in medicaid dollars. this unsustainable path jeopardizes the ability of the federal and state governments to provide the assistance to the most vulnerable patients who rely on the program. hca allows us to be better stewards to our health care dollars.
it allows us to spend within our means. it is the same thing small businesses have to do every day, spend within their means. do we need to take care of the most vulnerable? yes we do. today, tomorrow and in the future by spending within our means. at the answer is being a better steward of taxpayer dollars and not just close our eyes to the fact that the current program is unsustainable. i yield back. >> thank you. madam chairman, to provide the best care to the most vulnerable , we not only need to deny this motion, we need to fully repeal the affordable care act through this bill and future actions, and we need to enhance this bill to give states the flexibility to provide for their own. i yield back. >> the gentleman yields back. the proponent of the motion is recognized for one minute. >> thank you beard let me
summarize by saying that cutting medicaid, $880 billion on medicaid spending is irresponsible. you don't just have to listen to me, listen to republican governors across our country. let me quote two, the governor from nevada. "expanding medicaid made health care accessible to many people who never had such options before." and from michigan. of positive data in terms of healthier behaviors and better outcomes helping people." the facts are clear. medica expansion provides health care to those who could not otherwise afford it and would remain uninsured. for 16ides coverage million seniors and people with disabilities. medicaid is the primary payer for long-term care for many syrians -- seniors.
consideration of the american health care act make an order and amendment that would strike all provisions of the bill that either alone or in combination with increase total out-of-pocket costs for health care paid by individuals who are not millionaires or will increase the number of individuals without health --urance and strike new task tax rates for the wealthy. mr. moulton is recognized for 10 minutes with one minute to close. umpcareave heard that increases choice and freedom. let's talk about where that is true. let's talk about choice. you have a choice between paying your rent, your heating bill and paying for treating breast cancer. paying forbetween cancer medicine for your kids bankruptcyto declare to do so. here is how it increases
freedom. freedom under this bill, literally millions of americans will be free from having health care. countless americans will be free from living longer and healthier lives, and all those americans will be free from the overwhelming benefits of low-cost preventative care. keepingg the benefit of health care costs reasonable for all of us who do have health insurance, because it keeps those without care out of the emergency room's. that is where they get the most costly health care in the world. i got a letter recently from larry, he was about to turn 69. his brother lives in a nursing home in within a year his brother will exhaust his savings and have to apply for medicaid. he will face the same prospect sometime after 2020. he wrote to me, "this plan will result in unavoidable suffering and many premature, preventable and perhaps agonizing, early
deaths in the state and across the nation, all to give a tax .1%." each of the top it is a false choice to making improvements to obamacare and passing this bill. you republican who calls this a reasonable debate on this committee when we could not even offer amendments before we voted on the bill. some of my republican colleagues say the bill cuts taxes for the middle class. in some ways it does, while the medically increasing their health care costs. mcauley for michigan said obamacare produced access to care for some individuals, because obamacare increased access for many more. these republican talking points are missing the point. it is like telling mrs. lincoln that the show was fantastic aside from the disruption
halfway through. we also hear the people back in the districts want this change, really? new polls say that only 24% of voters support this bill. only 37% of republican voters are for it. there are a lot of democrats who are ready and willing to have a fact-based, truth based discussion about how to improve obamacare. in fact, i know many republicans are, as well. but voting for this bill only makes the situation worse for everyone. with that i would like to yield to mr. yarmouth. , i am proud to join you in sponsoring this motion to instruct. let's take a moment and think about why we are here today. republicans don't like the affordable care act. we get that.
republicans can campaign now for against the affble care act, promising to repeal it. we get that. now it is put up or shut up time and republicans have been forced to come up with an alternative. we are staying in this debate ,oday and through these motions if you are going to come up with an alternative, make it something that actually improves the situation. don't talk to us about the problems with the affordable care act, we understand there are problems. tell us how this plan makes it better. providesow this plan quality care at an affordable price in a way that is better than the affordable care act. that is what we have not seen. we have even seen claims that don't make sense. i listened to mr. smith from
missouri talking about wheelchair texas. wheelchairs are exempt from the tax, as are most medical products under the law. what we're saying in this amendment is, do not pass anything that adds to the cost of middle america, middle income by enormousaid for tax cuts for the wealthiest americans, for major pharmaceutical companies and other major corporations. i yield back. >> i want to thank the ranking member. i yield one minute. >> thank you. i want to thank my colleagues from massachusetts. i agree with many of my republican colleagues. thatand in all of congress we want to do something about health care costs, which for many are too high in the entire system -- and e entire system is continuing to be too
expensive for many americans. the affordable care act was invested in prevention to address that. we do that successfully and continually, which this bill manages and completely destroys, the u.s. could decrease treatment costs by $218 billion per year and reduce the economic byact of chronic diseases $1.1 trillion annually. this is not a bill about making health care affordable, it certainly is not a bill about making it affordable and accessible for middle-class families. this is about giving insurance and pharmaceutical companies a giant bonus. i yield back. missyield one minute to wasserman schultz. >> i have in my hand what is known as a wish sandwich. a wish sandwich is two pieces of bread in which you wish had something in between them. there is nothing there.
like a wish sandwich, republicans can wish all the promises they made were there in e, but they are not. our nations uninsured rate is below 9% now. those are the facts. the republican bill aims to roll that back by snatching health care away from millions of americans. now that we have the cbo score, we know that 24 million people will be thrown off their health insurance by 2026 and low income americans will be hit hardest. they estimate 14 million people will lose medicaid coverage over the next 10 year we are talking about children, pregnant women, seniors, disabled people and patients struggling to make ends meet. not unlike a wish sandwich. my republican colleagues are forcing hard-working families to foot the bill for a tax break to millionaires and billionaires. a wish sandwich is not what the american people were promised and it is shameful. i yield back.
>> i yield one minute. >> thank you. thank you for offering this motion. republicans claim that the repeal plan would make insurance more affordable for the american people, but he will in fact do the opposite. this bill especially raises costs for older americans by allowing insurance companies to charge seniors higher premiums than under the current law. the aarp estimates the people 60-64 would be charged over $3000 more every year for insurance. many seniors live on fixed incomes and are already struggling to afford the cost of health insurance. under this bill, older americans will struggle even more to purchase insurance and they will be in the worst position without health care than a young individual might be. this will only lead to worse outcomes.
it baffles me that republicans are willing to charge seniors for -- more for their health insurance while giving insurance ceos millions of tax breaks. americans should not have to pay more for less, and older americans should not be subjected to an age tax. alternativeot facts. i urge my colleagues to support the motion to instruct. i yield back. johnson ofize mr. ohio for 10 minutes. >> thank you. i rise in opposition to this motion. i want to thank my colleague, ms. wasserman schultz, for showing the wish sandwich. i actually grew up eating wish sandwiches, so i know what they taste like. is thatrtunate thing the american people have been eating wish sandwiches on health care for the last seven years under obamacare. is thing we both agree on
that we want all americans to have access to affordable, quality health care. we agree on that. unfortunately, obamacare does not give us that. it is harming millions of americans. health care costs are skyrocketing, patient choices are dwindling and millions are forced to pay a penalty or by health insurance that they do not want. americans may have health insurance on paper, but they don't have access. there is a big difference between health insurance coverage and access to affordable health care. let me give you two examples. tocambridge, ohio, i talked a couple who owned a business. $18,000 per year premium, $9,000 per your deductible. that is $27,000 out of their pockets before the insurance company pays a dime. another couple out of richmond, ohio.
$9,000 premium, deductible, 20,000 9 -- one $9,000 out of their pocket. that is not access to affordable health care. instead of expanding the number with access by making coverage more affordable, we know obamacare penalizes americans who do not buy a health care plan, often because the cannot afford to. that meets the standards of washington bureaucrats, but that does not meet the standards of hard-working, middle-class american people. millions of americans have found health care under obamacare to be so unappealing and unaffordable that instead of purchasing coverage, they have chosen the pay the individual mandate penalty. according to the irs in place 16, roughly 6.5 million americans paid $3 billion for
the penalty and more than 12.7 million clinton exist -- claimed an exemption. those people decided obamacare was not worth the trouble or price. thata recently announced they are leaving the obamacare exchanges at the end of the year. it is reported that humana's membership has declined by 69% since last year. the company is seeing further signs of an unbalanced risk full. their withdrawal will have a big impact in states ke tennessee asumana is the only exchang in short in -- insurer in several counties. our plan does not force individuals into a health care plan. it will empower patients to make the right health care decisions for themselves and their families. given the freedom afforded to choose the plan that best fits
their needs under our plan, it should not be a surprise that cbo projects individuals will exercise that freedom. cbo confirms that most of the dropping coverage is attributed to the repeal of the individual mandate, because people are no longer forced to purchase coverage. mandated in 2018, for example, while we tonsition from obama care patients under performs, 6 million people will stop using medicaid. they will choose to purchase a plan that works for them and that they can afford. people are making decisions based on their best interest. why is that a bad thing? our planlly, strengthens medicaid, a critical lifeline for millions of americans. it is a good thing to focus medicaid on those who need it
most, women, children, the elderly, seniors and those with disabilities. let those who choose to transition office medicaid moved to a plan of their own choosing. madam chair, at this time i would like to yield some time to my colleague from texas. >> thank you, mr. johnson. texasof folks in west wish obamacare would just go away, and i am proud and excited and delighted to have the opportunity to make their wishes come true. i'm looking at the motion here, don't make middle-class americans pay more -- more than what? more than 25% increase on their premiums? an increase in their deductibles? at itha huge tax on the middle class. millions ofs forced
middle-class individuals to pay the penalty rather than sign up for insurance. care, that they don't need and cannot afford. as a result, over 20 million people paid the fine or got an exemption, rather than sign up for obamacare appeared twice the number of people who enrolled in obamacare. while, 12 million other, mostly middle-class individuals and families suffered with increasing deductibles, increasing premiums, trapped in forced into and unaffordable care. districts like mine are made up of small businesses, family farms and main street americans. obamacare and the crushing $58 billion in regulations have decimated rural community hospitals. cbo projected that because of government mandates, we would lose millions of small business jobs. that is west texas. that is rural america. that is a tax on the middle
class. i guilt back to my colleague. >> thank you. i yield two minutes to mr. ferguson from georgia. >> thank you. will read this beard strike all provisions of the bill that either alone or in combination with increase the total out-of-pocket cost for health care paid by individuals who are not millionaires or will increase the individuals who don't have access to care. johnson, iman, mr. wonder why in the world my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to not have the courage orisdom to ask this question and offer this resolution when obamacare was on the table, as well. i have a constituent who came into my office this past week. he laid on my table his insurance premiums from two years ago of $900. .hen he laid on the next year
it had risen to $1700. in this year, it will be over $2400 per month. twice is month as he pays for his house. with a $7,000 deductible. he and his wife and their six children simply cannot afford to go to the doctor. it is devastating them. mr. assad and millions of other middle-class families and small business owners and those with limited incomes, i guess they also want thisow the answer why question was not asked when the democrats have a chance many years ago. i yield back. >> thank you. madam chair, we've heard it mentioned several times that the american health care act is going to cut medicaid.
i don't think that is what cbo actually said. i think what cbo actually said is that by 2026, we would be spending a lot less on medicaid. i come from a business background. there is a big difference between cutting something and making something more efficient and more cost effective. that is what the american people have asked us to do, and that is what we do under the american health care act. we focus medicaid spending on the people who need it, we put competition and innovation into the system so that it costs less , quality goes up and those that are on medicaid today can begin to transition their lives to choose the health care plan that they want. the claim that the american health care act is growing --
throwing millions of americans off the medicaid bus is and west, it is untrue ought to tell the truth. i guilt back. >> the gentleman yields back. mr. moulton is recognized for one minute to close. yield -- i would like to yield. >> thank you. i want to say to my republican colleagues that you better proceed carefully. if you believe the myth of lower-cost, you do it at your own risk. your bill imposes a huge age tax on the near seniors, people 50-64 years old in your district. ,hat is the reason why the aarp 35 million members strong, opposes the repeal bill. the cbo told us and it bears
repeating that the cost of insurance for a 64-year-old earning $26,000 per year would go from $1700 under obamacare to ,600 under the republican plan. these premiums will leave older americans unable to afford insurance and by 2026, the uninsured rate for americans 50-64 earning less than thousand dollars per year would more than double to 30% according to cbo. here is the headline in a new york times article. plan lowers how the premiums. it pushes out older people. if that is what you want to do, do it at your own risk. >> the ladies time has expired. signify byn favor, saying aye? those opposed?
>> madam chairman? >> are there any members who have not voted question change their vote? are 13hat vote, aye's and the no's are 21. >> i recognize the member. >> i have a motion. >> ms. lee and this czajkowski moved that the committee request on behalf of the committee that the rules for consideration of the american health care act make in order, an amendment that would strictly coach from the bill to prohibit its -- prohibits funding for planned parenthood for one year. >> i recognize the proponent of , for 10, ms. lee
minutes with one minute to close. >> my motion to instruct is really very simple. it would strike language from the republican bill that funding forndatory planned parenthood for one year. here we are again with the bill that attacks women and women's access the conference of health care. by d planned parenthood for one year, this disastrous bill leaves millions of women's out -- women out in the cold. it would prevent millions of women from accessing critical health care services such as cancer screenings and contraceptive care. even worse, more than 390,000 women would lose access and update 650,000 women could face reduced access to preventive health care. parenthood isned not just dangerous to the health of millions of individuals, it would hurt our nations economic
security. according to the congressional budget office, defunding planned parenthood would increase the federal deficit by $106 million over the next six years. cbo found that defunding planned parenthood would lead to more unintended pregnancies, not less. we know that planned parenthood is one of the nation's leading providers of high-quality, affordable health care for women and their families. in 2014 alone, planned parenthood provided critical 2.5th care services to million patients, more than 360,000 breast cancer exams and 270,000 pap tests. in my state, planned parenthood serves 776,000 women in 2014. 18% of those were on medicaid. denying access to planned
parenthood would hurt women who need these services the most, low income women and women of color. i don't know if these are intended or unintended consequences. regardless, this is what you are doing in this bill. i would like to yield three minutes to mischa caskey, the cosponsor of the motion. >> i am proud to offer the motion with my colleague. here we go again. last week we spent quite some morningtwo in the discussing whether the provision in the republican repeal bill targets just planned parenthood. the cbo cleared this up for us when it stated that in no uncertain terms "only planned parenthood federation of affiliation -- affiliates would be affected." the witch hat goes on. this is in direct contradiction
to what we were told. it begs the question of why republicans of trying to pretend this is anything other than defunding planned parenthood. that communityim health centers can just make up the difference despite study communityy and the health centers themselves saying otherwise. over half of planned parenthood shortagenters are in areas, rule or underserved areas. these areas of desperately need more care providers and yet republicans are trying to make it harder for women in these areas to access care. we talking about a lot of women. one in five women use planned parenthood for their primary health care for cancer screenings, hiv and std testing. and yes, men also use planned parenthood clinics. the cbo projects that about 15% of people living in those areas
would lose coverage and lose access to care. there is no access that community health centers could take on all the planned parenthood patients or provide the same level of reproductive health services. abortion rates are at historic lows. defunding planned parenthood and other reproductive health providers would take away the very services that have lowered those rights. ironic that republicans claim they want to increase choice for people and allow them to make their own health decisions and choose their own providers. apparently that does not apply to women. let me be clear, the republican plot to defund planned parenthood is nothing more than a direct attack on women. that is why i strongly urge support for this motion so we can finally remove this harmful provision from the republican
repeal bill. american women are watching and trust me, they are not just democratic women and women of all stripes and political parties. i yield back. >> thank you. i yield one minute to mr. jeffries. warust when we thought the on women was over, this outrageous bill comes to the rescue. , i don'tdon't think understand the clinical of session that many of my colleagues have with planned parenthood. it is unhealthy and unconscionable. planned parenthood does a tremendous amount of good so the don't justerica, and take my word for it. when discussing planned parenthood on several occasions, also, trump stated "they women., serve we have help women. a lot of women are helped, so we have to look at the positives for planned parenthood."
he also stated "millions and millions of women with cancer are helped by planned parenthood." well said, mr. president. i yield back. >> i yield one minute. >> i support this motion to stop yet another irresponsible attack on women's health. last congress i sat through an unbelievable 15 month charade of a select committee whose sole purpose was to spread false information about planned parenthood. now the majority is continuing their reckless campaign by denying life-saving care to americans something because they oppose a woman's constitutionally protected right to choose. sometimes it seems like all this oes is attack women's health, but as long as that happens, i will keep remind people that 2.9 million american women receive health care from planned parenthood.
many of those are low income. moreed parenthood provides than 34,000 cancer screenings in washington state. nationwide, they prevent more than 500,000 unintended pregnancies. politicians do not have the right to make health care decisions for women, it is that simple. i support this motion and i yield back. >> would like to yield one minute to ms. wasserman schultz. >> thank you. in yet another attack on women's health, a republican bill would defund one of our nations most google health care dividers, planned parenthood. in five women has relied on a planned parenthood center for care in her lifetime. republicans will tell you that redirecting funds to community health centers will prevent the gap in services americans will experience as a result of this devastating cut, but we know that is false. many planned parenthood clinics
are in rural and underserved communities. willng the funding translate to millions of americans going without high-quality, affordable health care provider. that is irresponsible. i urge my colleagues to support the motion. >> i would like to yield one minute. yourank you for leadership. like many of my colleagues, i am horrified at the maniacal crusade that the majority has been pursuing to destroy women's access to health care with little regard to who actually gets hurt. according to polling by kaiser family foundation, 75% of americans agree that defunding planned parenthood is a bad idea. of republican57% women and 55% of republican men. defunding planned parenthood hurts rural american -- rural women. patients -- at least 70%
receive medicaid or title x. was said, many are located in medically underserved areas like role immunities. 15% of those people would lose access to care. >> the time is expired. toat urge my colleagues support this motion and yield back. saying i haven by been a nurse for over 45 years so this is a subject matter which i know about personally from caring for women in being a woman myself. we want to make sure that women have access to health care services and preventative care they need. ensuring that our federal tax dollars are not going to an organization that performs collective abortions like planned parenthood. the republican proposal does not take money away. let me say that again. it does not take money away.
instead it redirects the funds to community health centers. these are nonprofit, community-based clinics that provide comprehensive, yes comprehensive care. i'm talking about centers that can diagnose and treat conditions. they are in underserved areas with high levels of poverty and infant mortality. there are more than 9000 community health centers facilities across this country. in 2015, community health centers provided health care services to more than 20 million americans, nearly 60% of which were female. in comparison, planned parenthood served fewer than 3 million in 2015. me say that again. the community health centers served 20 million while land. served 3 million. planned parenthood advocates regular claim that women receive
mammograms at these facilities, none of these organizations, 650 of these facilities, offer mammograms. in contrast, community health major providers of mammograms, particularly to women who are hispanic african-american, medicaid recipients and uninsured. these centers have the ability to provide comprehensive women's health care services, not just diagnosis but treatment. up a reportto bring , not a report that comes from republicans but from planned parenthood themselves. at their own look report. this is their own language. this comes from their 2016 report. we've not received 2017 yet. contraceptive services have dropped by nearly 18% in one year and are down by 20% since 2010. so the claim that women get
their contraceptives from their, the services have dropped by 80%. cancer screening and prevention services have dropped by 27% in since 2010.d 57% overall total services dropped by 11% in just one year and are down 40% since 2010. -- 14% since 2010. yet the record number of , basicallyre 329,000 unchanged from the prior year. talk about those preventative services that women need, we can see that those services are down while abortion services are maintained at the same level. on an issue as highly charged as abortion were the american people are deeply divided, we should make every effort to ensure that their taxpayer dollars do not go to the nation's largest single provider of abortions you'd this bill
includes those protections. it is important to note that this provision only applies for one year, which would give congress the necessary time to determine whether to continue this policy forward in future legislation. their report will give us an indication once we see the 2017 report, we can see if the services that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle hold up as being services that are needed by women and a war on women -- and let me say, when i hear the phrase a war on women, it makes me shudder. 22,999y of those 300 babies aborted our female? you want to talk about a war on women? how many of those little girls will never be able to grow up never reach their fullest
attention. that is the true war on women, let's be honest. in addition to providing an additional $422 million to community health care centers that they are not currently , and if we were to listen to my colleagues on the other side of the isle which use a good meyer report, good meyer is taken from the original founder of planned parenthood. i have a question about the report. addition to providing this $422 million to community health care centers to provide , that iference of care we are going to overlook them, we absolutely should give them more money to serve the needs of low-income women, the american health care act ensures that women on medicaid will have access to breast and cervical cancer screening and treatment. additional dollars for these
services will begin to these community health care centers to be sure that when they take on these additional services, they will have money to treat women for these particular services. i would like to yield three minutes to my colleague mr. whittle -- would all from georgia. >> i am hard-pressed to improve only had to say. instruct,tions to with keeping the bill from harming women. i was thinking about the community health centers. i was in my district just two weeks ago, and as you have seen medicaid dollars get diverted to ged men, you have seen a squeeze on the intended recipients of the program, women and children. the center in my district has
started a pediatric and dental clinic. , theseo hard to find folks are taking care of their children incident themselves. they are expanding their services and doing amazing work in that space. this bill would add 10% to the community health center budget. i promise you those dollars will be used to serve. i read section 103, the section the folks are talking about striking. it doesn't say a word about planned parenthood. it does say we will not fund clinics that provide abortions. i don't doubt my colleagues for a moment when they tell me this isn't about abortions, this is about providing services to women, i don't doubt them for a moment. i've never been to a planned parenthood clinic but i don't doubt them. the what my chairwoman has told me is this is a one-year provision. thate abortion provisions planned parenthood provide is
such a minor, inconsequential version of their portfolio and ist they are committed to mammograms and cervical cancer and birth control and a panoply of women's health issues, you can count me as your advocate. theday planned parenthood sites ending life is not part of their mission, preserving life is. that is all this bill asks for. mr. jeffries says he wants to know when the war on women is going to be over. i would tell my friend there was never a war on women, but there is a fight for life, and if my friend believes that fight is over, it is night. it never will end. i promise you, there is not one person on the other side of this more than anys member on the site of the table, not one. we are talking about abortion, we are talking about life, we are not talking about women's health care services.
the moment my friends concede that abortion does not need to be part of their portfolio, they can count me in support, but today i oppose this motion to obstruct and i yield back. >> i yield the balance of the time. >> i not here to relitigate roe v. wade, i just don't want my tax dollars to go to places and people that provide abortion, and the vast majority of americans agree and opposed using federal funds for abortion. this sentiment is reflected in the bipartisan height amendment that we passed every year barring federal dollars from being used for abortions. is american health care act merely enforcing the spirit and intent of the hyde amendment. this is diminishing the fact that planned parenthood is the largest abortion provider in the country. to make the argument that planned parenthood does not receive direct funding for abortions is to question the
intelligence of the american spongewho understand the ability of money. womengest this bill harms is a hollow argument. the laurafounder of bush institute for women, i am offended by these hyperbolic accusations by my colleagues on the other side of the aisle. ahca does the right thing. i yield back. recognize the proponent one man. >> let me say once again that i'm extremely disappointed that this fast-track reconciliation bill with defund planned parenthood and undermine the health and well-being of women and families. it is a sham and a shame. republicans are making this about abortion when it is not and should not be about members
of congress interfering in women's private health care decisions. would also like to note that while my colleagues on the other side of the aisle try to tell is that planned parenthood does not appear in the bill, that simply is not true. cbo is clear that only planned parenthood, its affiliates and clinics would be affected by this disastrous and heartless provision. we know that for many women in america, planned parenthood is the only place they can access high-quality health care. we should be expanding planned parenthood so that more women can receive the care they need and deserve rather than taking way health care for the most vulnerable women. i urge my colleagues to support this motion. thank you and i yield back. question of agreeing to the motion. all those in favor signify by saying aye. those opposed. appeared thee
>> madam chairman, no. >> are there any members who have not voted or wish to change their vote? the clerk shall report. 14 and the nose no's are 21. billing >> the motion is not a great too. ms. motion offered by delaunay and wasserman schultz peered a move that they request on behalf of the committee that the rule for consideration of the american health care act of 2017 make an order and commitment that would strike -- by repealing
the additional medicare tax on high income workers. -- recognizeeneath for a total of 10 minutes with one minute to close. >> one of the most unconscionable parts of this dangerous bill is that it directly attacks seniors and the medicare program. medicare is a lifeline for more than 58 million americans, including 90,000 in my district alone. my motion would protect seniors and medicare by eliminating the responsible provision that robs the medicare trust fund of $170 billion. consideringare today unnecessarily weakens the trust fund solvency by three years. it does this by providing the top .1% of the wealthiest americans a tax cut of more than $200,000 per year. this is a tax cut they did not ask for and don't need.
a comes at the expense of our nation's seniors. it is truly shameful. turn day, 10,000 americans 65. they expect medicare to be there for them just as it was for generations before. in 10 years, 75 million americans will rely on medicare for affordable, quality health care. we should be strengthening medicare, not setting our country on a path toward another unnecessary, manufactured crisis. medicare reduces poverty and ensures seniors and people with disabilities always have access to the care they need. i recently sat down with three seniors in my district at a kitchen table. and lance and grace. a told me how medicare is important to each of them i providing coverage they need at a price they can afford. if this bill goes forward with the provision intact, robbing the medicare trust fund and damaging the program's future, it is doris, lance, grace and
others like them that will be harmed. we should not be passing a bill that does nothing to improve anyone's life, and especially not a bill that ultimately forces seniors to pay more for their care. it is hard to believe we here having this debate. i yield three minutes to ms. wasserman schultz. thank you for yielding. this is simple. we should be strengthening medicare for seniors and disabled workers, not weakening it. our motion aims to strip away the truck care for his vision that would shorten the medicare trust fund by three years. contrast to the affordable care act, which extended the trust fund by 11 years. 68 million seniors and americans with disabilities depend on medicare for the health care, including more than 4 million in my home state of florida. that number is not getting smaller. as our nation's population gets
older in the next 10 years, that number will increase to more than 75 million people. we soon will have greater need for the program and fewer resources to support it. with this bill, republicans plan to get the top .1% a tax break of more than $200,000 per year all on the backs of seniors. of4-year-old with an income $26,500 in the individual market will play $12,900 more in premiums every year. to be clear, the bill starts to prey on the elderly even before they become seniors, when they are in their 50's. arpthe words of the a they would be charged an age tax, not only is it cruel but unsustainable. older americans will be charged yng times more than peleinudg osalady
on a fixed income. we have a nonpartisan analysis willrming that trumpocare deliver less care for mold -- millions of americans struggling to get by. this bill would yank insurance coverage from 14 million people next year. longer-term projections are even more grim, with as many as 24 million people projected to lose coverage by 2026. a republican colleagues are trying to discredit this analysis, but no matter how you slice this, the numbers would be appalling. i also note the eye net -- irony that the director of the cbo was appointed by republicans. it seems you can ask anyone except republicans assessed with repealing the affordable care act, they will tell you this bill hurts seniors in the very
people president trump promised to protect. we cannot take this prescription to make americans sick again. >> i yield one minute. >> thank you. i want to echo ms. wasserman schultz and comments about what these cuts are doing. recommend the paper in the annals of internal medicine. they point out that medicare is the most efficient program that exists. it is a 2.2% overhead. what we ought to be doing is extending medicare, not weakening it. this provision, this bill would weaken medicare and potentially bankrupt medicare by 2028. i strongly support this motion. i yield back my time. >> thank you.
i yield one minute to mr. carbajal. >> thank you for yielding. thank you for offering this important motion. seniorsately 127,000 and persons with disabilities in california's 24th congressional district count on medicare to provide affordable, quality health care. will only increase as our nation's population gets older. we should be strengthening medicare, not weakening it. this bill takes a staggering $170 billion out of the medicare trust fund and shortens its lifespan by three years. this will result in a more seniors living in poverty. it does this while giving the , those withmericans an annual income of $3.9 million or more, let me repeat that,
$3.9 million or more, a tax cut of more than $200,000 per year. this provision threatens our nation's most honorable citizens, and for that reason i ask my colleagues to support this motion to instruct. i yield back. >> i yield back to mr. kautsky. >> thank you. trump bret more than once during the campaign and that he was elected, was the first and only potential gop candidate two-state there will be no cuts to social security, medicare and medicaid. he has done that to great applause of his audience. the truth is, the promise will be broken if this bill becomes law. it will reduce solvency by three years of medicare, snatching
$117 billion from the trust fund to get the richest americans a tax break. this still allows insurance to charge older americans thousands more for insurance, increased cost to medicare, reduce funding for the medicare trust fund, and it is clear how house republicans intend to treat senior citizens. it actually opens the door for more republican proposals. free preventive care, turning medicare into a voucher program, which is something the speaker of the house has promoted along with the hhs secretary. seniors across the country are paying close attention and have every reason to worry. voters, theyiable pay attention to their cost for health care, and i would urge all of my colleagues to support this motion. i yield back.
>> thank you. again, it is quickly important that we support medicare. i urge my colleagues to support this motion and i yield back. >> i recognize the opponent of the motion for 10 minutes. >> thank you. meet with i constituents in indiana, i hear about the crushing burden that taxes included in obamacare have on businesses and families. if we are going to repeal this insidious law, and thankfully we are, doesn't it make sense to repeal the terrible taxes that went with it? obamacare has imposed upon us americans 21 new taxes costing more than $1 trillion, many of which have impacted lower middle-class americans. in addition to hitting these families with increased taxes, obamacare also hits the same
lower middle-class families by cutting medicare providers and services, using those savings for yet new and more government programs under obamacare. it just continues to fascinate me that anytime the left gets an , they go to people a new government program and pay for it by taxing us even more with absolutely no regard for the jobs that will be lost. if a company is getting taxed they private or public, have less money to hire someone with. if they keep the person on the job, they may go out of business altogether because of these taxes. the to don't do one or or combination, the consumer into the paying a higher price for the goods or service provided by these companies. ironically, the same consumers that the left proposes to try to help. particularus tax in
targeted seniors, it is driving up the cost of prescription drugs by increasing taxes on drug companies. who better to pay for your leftist plan than a profit-making company like a drug company? that is what the left thinks. since 2011, nearly $7 million has been collected from prescription drug manufacturers leading to higher prices on those who have no choice but to pay the cost like seniors. taxesing to the cbo, this expected to raise twice $7 billion over 10 years. as all americans know, those drug were not born by the companies, but were passed on to consumers in the form of higher prices. for example, gilead sciences reported in 2015 that their tax lower the company's earnings share to $.85 per
share. it is highly likely that in order to stay in business and key people hired, they passed costs on to consumers. this tax, along with other taxes and obamacare, need to be repealed. this will put more money in the pockets of americans who need it. older americans who need it. paying for obamacare's phil policies on the backs of seniors was not a solution with law was passed and it has only gotten worse. i fully support repealing these taxes and preserving medicare for future generations. thekfully, because of leadership of this committee over the last six years, we have put solutions in place. solutions that strengthen medicare to make sure it is around for the next generation and not continuing to add to our $20 trillion debt. did we get a better idea from
the left when we put these ideas forward the last six years? no, we got tv commercials with a gentleman acting as if he was going to push an elderly citizen off a cliff. that is what the left present is a better idea. needs to repeal this insidious law and its taxes and bring real medicare reform to this country so it is around for our children and grandchildren without giving them the bill. i would like to yield three minutes to the gentleman from georgia. >> thank you. me, i feel a to ,ittle bit like mr. kita does every time we turn around and look at the left, they believe they can tax their way out of a problem. what we have seen after 21 new billion --lmost $1
excuse me, almost $1 trillion in cost, we have seen an implosion of health-care billion -- excuse system and health care plan. what is happening is that the $716 billion that was stripped wasof medicare with the aca used not pay for health care but to grow government urography that is crushing our ability as providers to deliver quality health care to our patients. i have been treating patients in my dental practice for 25 years. we understand that the ongoing cost of regulation and burdens doesn't result in higher quality care for the patients. in fact, it diminishes the quality of care. for patients, whether they are young or old. it is something i experienced firsthand year in and year out. the further this plan when a long, the lesser my ability to spend quality time with patients and provide them the care they needed.
i don't come from an area that is extremely wealthy. i come from an area where the majority of our population lives below the median standard of living. i come from an area made up of hard-working men and women that are fighting every, single day. one of the things they want after a long career of working and fighting and scrapping to raise their families and provide an income is they want exactly what someone on the other side just said, they expect and want medicare to be there in the end. is that wepening now are being quite disingenuous when we say repealing the aca will save medicare. it won't. reforms and an honest conversation with ourselves and the american people are needed to maintain solvency of a program that is so needed by
seniors and americans across this nation. programn't reform this and make it effective and make it sustainable, not only will we be on able -- unable to keep her promise on medicare, but because of the damage of the mandatory spending curve on the budget, we will not be able to keep a single promise we have made no matter which party is in control. being willing to have a tough conversations about this program are important because it is an important program. my mom and dad use this program. they have worked hard all their lives and they receive this benefit, as they should. i will to you that if we continue to go down this road and we continue to kick the can down the road and we are disingenuous by saying that repealing the affordable care act will in fact save medicare, we are fooling ourselves, and
shame on us for that. we have got to do a better job. we can no longer look each other in the face and say, by stripping $716 billion out of military -- medicare to make obamacare work in the beginning -- the would like to recognize remainder of the time. >> it is the height of irony to have the other side offer a motion on weakening medicare because the cruelest political con i have seen in my lifetime was the idea that obamacare robs $716 billion out of medicare. they say that increases the solvency of medicare but then they turn around and spend it on the aca. that was the double counting that everybody acknowledged. the total dishonest accounting. it will increase the solvency of
the program, but then we spend it on the aca. ever wonder why we have a $20 trillion debt? we can count. how they so-called increase the solvency, they increase provider payments. it is hospitals, doctors, nurses. you know what that amounts to? fewer benefits, less access and this week in the local paper in minneapolis, i will read you a startling announcement in a recent speech to employees. the rochester-based health preference tove patients with private insurance over those with lower paying medicaid or medicare coverage if they seek care at the same time conditions."arable that is defective rationing. nursing when you get reimbursed at 60% of market rate, we are not interested in your business.
that is what the affordable care act and the other side did to medicare beneficiaries. now they are talking about weakening medicare, are you kidding me? we have two choices to save medicare. incan reform the system, as 2024 when the program goes to $1 trillion, it is insolvent. we all know that. we can offer a new plan. some form of premium subsidies. or we can continue with the other side by cutting provider payments and having doctors and clinics opt out of care for medicare beneficiaries. >> the gentleman's time is expired. the proponent of the motion is recognized for one minute to close. >> thank you. the way to ensure our health-care system is working is to build off of the reforms we have already made and make improvements, like allowing medicare to negotiate drug prices. this bill does the exact opposite. older americans want to see
medicare strengthened and preserved for generations, not attacks. it is another broken promise from this president, who repeatedly committed not to cut medicare. this notion would restore that promise. withtacks people disabilities and seniors just to give a tax cut to the wealthiest americans. if you are democrat or republican, it makes no difference, this bill makes no sense and we all know it. not for seniors, not for those with disabilities, for lance, doris, grace and millions like them, and it was my colleagues to support this motion and i yield back. >> the question is on agreeing to the motion. all those in favor signify. .hose opposed in the opinion of the chair, the no's have it.
>> are there any members who have not voted or wish to change their vote? the clerk shall report. thehe aye's are 13 and no's are 21. >> the motion is not agree to. i recognize the congresswoman from new mexico for proposal. >> thank you. lester, donald trump promised to end the opioid epidemic. gresham -- if you would? >> i have a motion at the desk so i just jumped right ahead. >> the clerk will read the motion. they move that the committee
on the budget has a chairman on the have the committee a rule on the american health care act make an amendment that would at any -- for him provision of the bill from taking effect until the secretary of health and human services certifies that relative to current law, its provisions and amendments would not decrease coverage for mental health and substance abuse disorder treatment, increase out-of-pocket costs for mental health and substance abuse disorder treatment, or undermine parity in coverage between mental health and substance abuse disorder benefits and other medical benefits. isms. lujan grisham recognized for 10 minutes with one minute to close. >> thank you. lester, donald trump promised to end the opioid epidemic. have pledged to provide resources to their
and many saw overdose deaths increase more than 20% from 4014 two 2015. pennsylvania, 20.1%. kentucky, 20.1%. ohio, 21.5%. after last year, i really believed that addressing this was a bipartisan issue. but here we are with a bill that would repeal the requirement that medicaid cover basic behavior health and addiction services. in my home state of new mexico, i can unequivocally tell you what that looks like when you combine and opioid academic with a lack of services and behavior health. opioid addiction has been a crisis in new mexico for two decades, long before the rest of the country. the stories of the lost lives are tragic, and they deserve to be heard. in fact, in january, president trump said description drug
companies are literally getting away with murder. i ask unanimous consent manager er into the record a collection of of actuaries describing the victims of opioid addiction in new mexico. >> without objection. town,s is from a small ,ore than one death per week which we submitted to the last white house and this one. many of them died because they don't have access to the treatment they need. this happens when you cut have your help and substance abuse services. people die. cutting funds from the medicaid program and removing benefit requirements mean that even fewer people will have access and even more people will die. taking them off the medicaid rolls will mean that fewer people have coverage to access to any treatment services that might remain. is the1.3 million people
treatment for mental health and substance abuse disorders i now yield to the gentleman from california. >> thank you congresswoman lujan grisham. i am honored to call lead this effort with you -- to: lead this effort with you. you a to share with little bit from my own experience. as a county supervisor, working as a local official, i saw firsthand, the challenges the individuals or families who were going through hardship were not having access to mental health services. i saw the crisis they were enduring. on a personal note, when i was a young boy, my sister committed suicide. ifannot think, but to think
it would have been a different outcome if she had access to mental health services. this republican replacement plan will make it harder for people suffering from mental health and substance abuse disorder to access the health coverage they need. it makes changes to the nongroup market, provides insufficient $880 billion guts from medicaid. low and moderate income people will be hit the hardest. an estimated 44 million americans experience a mental illness each year, including over 10 million whose illness is serious enough that it interferes with their daily life activity. i urge my colleagues to support this motion, and to support continued access to mental health care. thank you. i yield back.
>> thank you. i want to thank the gentlelady for yielding and for this motion . i am in full support of it. once again, this bill shamefully repeals the medicaid expansion, ending coverage for our mental health and substance abuse disorder services for millions. let me be clear, this bill would worsen the opioid epidemic and reduce access to mental health services. it would kick 1.2 million people with a serious mental health disorder and 3 million people with a substance abuse disorder off of medicare. we know that under aca, medicaid expansion expanded access to high-quality, affordable mental health and substance abuse care. by ripping away access to these
services, we hurt those who need help the most. low income individuals and people of color. i hope you care about these americans also, but the consequences of what you are doing today really make me wonder. there are some winners and losers, and the most vulnerable people are the losers. as a social worker by profession, i know firsthand that all americans deserve access to quality mental health care. it is important for their care, their community and our economy. thank you. >> thank you. i yield one moment this one moment to the ranking member. >> thanks to my colleagues for yielding did in last month, emergency services received 52 over those calls over the course of 32 hours. articles from the
washington post, new york times, usa today thatnd details how the opioid crisis is affecting my constituents. as my colleague mentioned, just last year on a bipartisan basis, we made a huge step forward and adjusting the problems plaguing our nation. as you mentioned, kentucky was one of those states. one.inly not the only by removing the guarantee of coverage and medicaid and forcing 24 million people off of their health care, as well as eliminating the guarantee that have insurance and commercial insurance includes this coverage, we are wiping out many of the gains we made to ensure access to mental health services . i urge your support to the motion -- support for the motion and yield back. >> i yield one minute to ms. jackson lee.
>> i think the sponsors for this . it is estimated that 49 million people were not have insurance. the city of says in 2026, it will be 52 million. among those are those who suffer from mental health issues. it is an reflection of the speakers comment, so what we don't want to do is try and encourage more obamacare type insurance plans. obamacare had mental health coverage for the many who are suffering from drug addiction. as my colleague from kentucky said, in the usa today article, she talks about her son who has been drug-free for 60 months she talks about her stepson who suffered from mental health issues and killed himself in 2010 after he could not get treatment. the question is, where is our compassion? for my fellow texans, 1,000,800
individuals got health care coverage under the affordable care act. 1,000,092 650,000 individuals purchase high-quality insurance. by this trumpcare bill, mental health persons will suffer and they will die. i support this amendment because i don't want americans to die. i yield back. chair.k you, madam i yield back to mr. chair. >> i think the gentlelady. i recognize the opponent of the motion, mr. cold from oklahoma. think the gentleman. i want to begin by acknowledging what my good friend from kentucky said. lester we did something in a , spent $500 million on grants around the country. we passed a bill and a mental health care overhaul.
i think this is a problem that we all recognize exists and we are willing to do something about. when i listen to the debate today, it is been a good debate. both sides have made sincere and detailed points. i look at it differently from some of our newer members, because i was here last time. i was a member of congress when obamacare was enacted. we were told that if we passed it, costs would go lower. they haven't we were told we would have more choices and we don't. we were told that if you like your doctor and plan, you can keep them. the reality is, for many people it wasn't the truth. in my home state, we are in a crisis in the obamacare system. our rates are going up 69% next year, for those who pay the full rates. we are down to a single provider for an entire state.
that doesn't sound like a successful system to me. when i look at the american health care act, i see several things. first, damage the three essential colors of our american health care system which first is player health care system. if anything, it pushes back this cadillac tax for eight years, something i think we need to get rid of. we should never be taxing people for their health care plans. it keeps the basic medicaid functions intact. it keeps medicare for older seniors. i agree with many of the comments made, both these systems are much in need of reform. the bill provides a transition to go for people who are -- transition period for people who are getting some form of obamacare. the act acts as a number of thing. it is not required.
if you don't want to be despair, you don't have to participate. that is a big change. it provides direct health to individuals in the form of tax credits. you can pick what you think is best for you. that to me is the hallmark of any good health care system. over time, it lowers the cost of premium, and again, over time, it lowers the -- it lowers the deficit of the country. not a bad thing. i think we should leave a failing system and move toward a system that promises to do better than what we are doing today. i would suggest that this product is and finalized. it is going to change during the course of the legislative process. it will change in the house and it will certainly change in the senate.re distilling -- staying where we are at is the wrong thing to do good on to yield three minutes to my good friend in new york. opportunity.te the
i think that all of us recognize the need to ensure that adequate and sufficient and good mental health services are available. i think as he stated, all of us on both sides have come to that point of view. the bottom line is that this legislation is going to give states more flexible multi-, in terms of how they -- more flexibility in terms of how they exercise. i am confident that in our state of new york, mental health and substance abuse will be something that would be significant for the designers of our plan. unlike the current system where near state has over 100 plan amendments pending at hhs, the states are going to be able to design programs and policies that will be efficient and effective for them. they will be -- there will be better oversight. it is impossible for us to
forget just a month ago the cbo told us that the national debt is going to go from $19 trillion to $29 trillion in 10 years. it would be irresponsible for us not to seek ways in which we can lower that that curve -- that debt curve. another aspect that has been raised by my friends on the other side, they complain about the age banding proposal. they call it age discrimination. age banding in the aca is three to one. you can charge a 60-year-old three times more than you can charge a 20-year-old. six weeks ago, it would give states the option to move five to one. the problem is going to be, in states like new york where the law says it has to be one to one. that is how new york state destroyed its insurance market. the key is to create more
flexibility and more flexibility for states to create -- for states to design more programs. the insurance law in fairness in the age banding situation, by not lowering costs efficiently for young, healthy people, we did not have enough of those people in the pools to support the insurance market. that is why so many insurers have pulled out of the system. an action where insurance market for it to function properly. that is why the option to move to a five to one age banding makes sense. states can do it and we need to do this because that is how we will lower premiums for the majority of american people, who right now are seeing extraordinary increases in their deductibles. extraordinary increases in their demands and unaffordable health coverage. what good is assurance -- what good is insurance if you cannot
afford it. >> mr. chairman, i would like to yield the balance of my time to my friend from georgia. ex i think my friend for yielding. -- >> i think my friend for yielding. your cosponsor over here is one of my favorite folks in this body and she is a warrior for folks, but she is a happy warrior. she is someone you know you can work with because she wants to make things better. i know that is the intent of this amendment. i don't know if my colleagues have had a chance to read the hill. i'm not recommending that publication to you on a regular basis. thent to recommend one of editorials, because it is from one of our colleagues, dr. tim murphy. he has been here a number of terms. he is a tireless fighter for mental health coverage in this body. it was entirely a collective
way, 422 to two that we finally passed his bill across the finish line and president obama signed into law. on to hear that someone you to hear what dr. merck -- i want you to hear what dr. murphy wrote. the aca did little to provide treatment for those suffering with mental village just mental illnessand -- mental and substance abuse. thoughtafter a long battling congress, president bush signed the act into law in 2008, but it wasn't until 2013 that the obama administration finally implemented parity, leaving millions of americans with behavioral health conditions fighting with insurance companies years after congress acted collaboratively to form the law. this bill is going to offer about $1 billion in new
flexibility for the great state of georgia. we are going to have opportunities to serve our population anyway that we have never had the opportunity to do it before. i oppose my friends amendment, because i don't want a mandate that everybody has to do it the same way. i think regions that have high opioid addictions are going to do it differently than places like alaska that has high suicide challenges. he gives us the opportunity to do it in ways in georgia that we have never had the opportunity to serve our constituency before. i encourage you to read the murphy's entire editorial. you will find two things. as a matter what low we passed if we lack the collective will to have an impact folks back home. you'll find it is his belief and our experience that we do share that collective will. we can make that difference for folks. i oppose the motion to instruct
mr. chairman. i look forward to working with my friend. i yield back. >> mr. the one crucial -- ms. lujan grisham, one minute to close. >> thank you, mr. chair. i appreciate the kind words of the balancedd and remarks about we all want to deal with this opioid addiction issue. we all want to deal with behavioral health issues. the reality is one of my very good friends who was one of the originators of making sure there was mental health parity law in this country which has never been realized. i want to remind members, pharmaceutical companies and insurance happenings who with no medivation to make it cost-effective or better. we are continuing to invest in their greed. we gave them patent protection. we give them non-negotiated prices.
we don't allow any reimportation back in. everything they have asked for, this congress has given them, including the insurance companies who were only regulated states. it is a negative basket of accountability. why would we give them the money that we need consumers to have to have access? i got seven seconds, quickly, new mexico already did it. >> you are overtime. -- >> aser yield back i yield back. you don't want this facility, vote yes. >> all those opposed. the no'shave it -- have it. [roll call vote]
>> are there members who have not voted. the dome in from alabama. -- the gentleman from alabama. >> mr. palmer has not recorded. .r. palmer, no >> are there any other members who wish to change their vote? seeing none. are 14chairman, the ayes and the no's are 22. >> that our votes expected be called on the house, but this time, the committee will stand in recess. we will resume directly after the votes on the floor of the house.