[Congressional Record Volume 156, Number 42 (Saturday, March 20, 2010)]
[House]
[Pages H1762-H1767]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
TRICARE AFFIRMATION ACT
Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill
(H.R. 4887) to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to ensure that
health coverage provided by the Department of Defense is treated as
minimal essential coverage, as amended.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 4887
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``TRICARE Affirmation Act''.
SEC. 2. TREATMENT OF DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE HEALTH COVERAGE AS
MINIMAL ESSENTIAL COVERAGE.
(a) In General.--Section 5000A(f)(1)(A) of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986, as added
[[Page H1763]]
by section 1501(b) of the Patient Protection and Affordable
Care Act, is amended--
(1) by striking clause (iv) and inserting the following new
clause:
``(iv) medical coverage under chapter 55 of title 10,
United States Code, including coverage under the TRICARE
program;'';
(2) by striking ``or'' at the end of clause (v);
(3) by striking the period at the end of clause (vi) and
inserting ``; or''; and
(4) by inserting after clause (vi) the following new
clause:
``(vii) the Nonappropriated Fund Health Benefits Program of
the Department of Defense, established under section 349 of
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1995
(Public Law 103-337; 10 U.S.C. 1587 note).''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall take effect as if included in section 1501(b) of the
Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and shall be
executed immediately after the amendments made by such
section 1501(b).
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Michigan (Mr. Levin) and the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Davis) each
will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Michigan.
General Leave
Mr. LEVIN. I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5
legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and
include extraneous material on H.R. 4887.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Michigan?
There was no objection.
{time} 1315
Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, under H.R. 3590, as passed by the Senate,
individuals are responsible for obtaining minimum essential health care
or pay a small penalty. The Senate bill states that anyone with
eligible employer coverage meets this requirement. The coverage that is
provided today for the members of our armed services and their families
and for military retirees and their families satisfies this
requirement. In an abundance of caution, H.R. 4887 was introduced by
our distinguished chairman, Mr. Skelton, to reaffirm this result.
I now reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, today the House is considering
H.R. 4887, the TRICARE Affirmation Act. While I support the bill we
have before us, I'm disappointed in another display of rushing the
process. Speaker Pelosi said that we need to pass the health care bill
so we can find out what's in it. This is, fortunately, one that was
found before it was passed. Think of how many other hundreds and
hundreds of possible errors there may be in that bill because of being
forced through quickly and being ill considered.
Moreover, as a former member of the 82nd Airborne Division, I'm
deeply disappointed that we had to leave out veterans. Those who have
served our country would actually become victims of a policy that the
Congress is enacting--inadvertently and not by any malice aforethought.
And I certainly thank and share my greatest appreciation with the
distinguished chairman, Mr. Skelton, of the Armed Services Committee,
who I served with for several years, for catching this and correcting
this wrong.
The bill wasn't added to the schedule until close to midnight last
night. Beyond the immediate process issues, the addition of this bill
to the calendar points to a troubled future if the Senate health care
bill passes the House tomorrow. We're many votes away from health care
reform becoming law, but already, as I mentioned, we're seeing
fundamental flaws in this Senate bill that require amendment.
As we all know, the health care bill that we'll consider tomorrow
contains a new requirement that every single American in this country
enroll in a health care plan that the government approves. President
Obama said that if you like your doctor, you can keep him--if he
approves. Now we have the IRS and we have Federal agencies that are
going to get into our private affairs, and now it's affecting our
veterans. If an individual does not have this coverage, they will be
subject to a penalty and even the possibility of prosecution through
the IRS.
H.R. 4887 essentially amends the not-yet-passed Senate health care
bill to clarify that all TRICARE plans are considered as minimal
acceptable coverage under the bill. It is the least that we can do for
our veterans. Defining TRICARE as such is important because it exempts
its enrollees from the individual mandate in the Senate bill.
As most know, TRICARE is a complete medical care benefit program for
active duty members and retirees of all seven uniformed services and
their dependents. TRICARE is currently open to about 9.3 million
potential beneficiaries. Active duty military, their spouses, and
dependents are automatically enrolled in TRICARE Prime. Retirees can
choose between TRICARE Prime or two other options. Then there is a
fourth subset called TRICARE for Life. These beneficiaries are enrolled
in Medicare, but TRICARE serves as a secondary payer.
Unfortunately, in the Senate health care bill, Democrats do not deem
TRICARE programs for servicemembers and military retirees under age 65
to provide minimum acceptable coverage. H.R. 4887 would clarify these
programs and make sure that they're included in this definition.
It's surprising to me that these programs were left out originally.
This is an important change to make, but I think this is only a
foreshadowing of what is to come for hardworking Americans.
The Senate health care reform bill has not even been signed into law
and we already have to fix it. If Democrats were originally willing to
adversely impact the health care coverage of these Americans who have
honorably served our country, you have to wonder whose health care is
safe.
These oversights occurred because this process is too big, too fast,
and being done against the will of the American people. I support this
amendment. It's critical that we protect our military families.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LEVIN. It's now my privilege to yield 2 minutes to someone who
has worked so hard for so many years on behalf of the veterans of this
country, the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton).
Mr. SKELTON. I certainly thank the gentleman from Michigan.
Mr. Speaker, it's a commonly known fact that I oppose the health care
reform bill as it exists currently and will vote against it tomorrow,
but my duty as the chairman of the Armed Services Committee compels me
to ensure that the health care of our brave service men and women, our
military retirees, and all of their family members are protected if the
bill does indeed pass.
In the health care bill currently under consideration in Congress,
which originated in the Senate, TRICARE and the Non-Appropriated Fund
health plans, the programs that provide health care for these
individuals, will meet the minimum requirements for individual health
insurance coverage, and no TRICARE or NAF health plan beneficiary will
be required to purchase additional coverage beyond what they already
have. However, to reassure our military servicemembers and their
families and make it perfectly clear that they will not be negatively
affected by this legislation, my bill, H.R. 4887, explicitly states in
law that these health plans meet the minimum requirements for
individual health insurance.
Our brave men and women in uniform provide us with first-class
protection. It's our obligation to provide them and their families with
first-class health care in return. Every day, our troops risk their
lives to stand up for us on the battlefield, and now I ask my
colleagues, no matter what the position you may have on health care
reform itself, to join me in standing up for our servicemembers and
their families.
Nobody knows what the fate of health care will be tomorrow, but by
supporting this bill that's before us right now, H.R. 4887, we will at
least know that we have protected those men and women who sacrifice
their lives to protect us. We must affirm for our military
servicemembers and their families that even if the health reform bill
passes, the coverage provided by TRICARE and the Non-Appropriated Fund
health plans will be properly defined in law as meeting the minimum
requirements for individual health insurance.
Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky. I now yield 4 minutes to the distinguished
ranking member of the Armed Services Committee, the gentleman from
California (Mr. McKeon).
[[Page H1764]]
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I
rise in support of H.R. 4887, which would try to fix a significant flaw
in the Democratic health care reform bill by including the Department
of Defense TRICARE program in what is considered minimum essential
coverage for the purposes of the individual mandate in the health care
bill.
Mr. Speaker, while I applaud Chairman Skelton for taking this step,
I'm deeply concerned and aware that it does not go far enough to
protect TRICARE from the ravages of ObamaCare. The simple truth is that
the Senate health care bill still leaves TRICARE, the world-class
health care program that takes care of 9.2 million of our men and women
in uniform and their families and retirees and their families open to
the whim of bureaucrats outside of the Department of Defense who may
change the program as they see fit. Is this what we want for the men
and women who lay their lives on the line every day to protect this
great Nation?
Last summer, the White House made two promises to America's Armed
Forces and their families:
One, that the health reform legislation that's being considered would
enable those who are covered by TRICARE to meet the shared
responsibility requirement for individuals to have insurance, thereby
exempting such members of the armed services and their families from
being assessed penalties. This is the explicit promise that the Senate
health care bill fails to meet. The chairman's resolution is an attempt
to meet that commitment, but what it definitely does is point out the
flaws in the Senate health care bill.
The second promise the President made is that the Secretary of
Defense would continue to maintain sole authority over TRICARE.
Chairman Skelton's language today does not address this promise. That
is why Mr. Buyer, the ranking member on the Veterans' Affairs
Committee, and I filed and will offer later today language at the Rules
Committee that would meet both of these promises.
We've been hearing since last summer many promises that this problem
would be fixed. Mr. Buyer and I even offered similar amendments to the
House version of the bill passed last fall. Our attempts were rebuffed
and the military service organizations were given assurances by the
Democratic leadership that TRICARE would be protected in a conference
report that never came.
Now we see this legislation that appeared in the dark of night. We've
been told that there's no cost associated with this legislation. We
cannot confirm that. History is rife with examples of House legislation
that does not survive in the Senate. In other words, there's no
guarantee that what the President finally signs will protect Medicare.
Mr. Speaker, I was told by a veteran that one of the problems we had
in the Vietnam War was pilots became so fixated on the target that they
ultimately crashed into the target. That's what I see happening with
this health care bill that the Democratic leadership and the President
are pushing. They're so fixated on getting something passed that
they're making so many mistakes that we're not going to be able to fix
them all. I will support my chairman's efforts today, but I will
continue to work toward a comprehensive fix.
Mr. LEVIN. I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from New Hampshire
(Ms. Shea-Porter).
Ms. SHEA-PORTER. I thank the chairman for his legislation. As a
member of the Armed Services Committee, I'm proud to be an original
cosponsor.
Mr. Speaker, we have a solemn responsibility to provide our
servicemembers with the care and the services that they are due. They
risk their lives in service to our Nation, and it's imperative that we
keep our promises to them.
This is not a Democratic or Republican responsibility, and as an
advocate for the members of our military and their families--and I
might add, as a former military spouse myself--it's troubling for me
that throughout the debate on health care reform that TRICARE would be
included as one of the topics of the various misinformation campaigns.
This bill will ensure that those members of our armed services can keep
their TRICARE coverage.
I'm proud to have stood in support of our servicemembers in the Armed
Services Committee, preventing increases in TRICARE copays, for
example. I'm pleased that the chairman, through this legislation, has
given us all the opportunity to reaffirm not only the importance of
TRICARE, but that, under our health reform legislation, these benefits
will remain as they are.
Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky. Now, Mr. Speaker, I'd like to yield such time
as he may consume to the distinguished ranking member of the Veterans'
Affairs Committee, a veteran of Desert Storm and a retired United
States Army Colonel, the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Buyer).
Mr. BUYER. Let me ask how much time the minority has.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. There are 13 minutes remaining.
Mr. BUYER. First of all, I'd like to applaud Buck McKeon and Ike
Skelton for their efforts, along with Mr. Levin, to permit this bill to
be considered, but we haven't gone far enough. Now, it's kind of what
happens when we rush or go too fast around here. We get sloppy in our
drafting.
Now, in the bill that was passed here in the House, there were
general authority provisions under the Secretaries of DOD and VA to
ensure that those health systems would be protected--the authorities,
their general provision authorities to the Secretaries would be
protected. That language was not in the Senate bill.
The Senate bill, which is now coming over here, interestingly enough,
to--which is about to be deemed. Pretty interesting. I don't know if
you know about the word ``deem.'' It comes from the old English origin
to ``dom,'' and to ``dom'' was from judges. It means to make judgment.
In the 17th century, judges actually then began to make rapid
judgments, and they called them ``deemers.'' The origin of to dom--
there are two words: to deem and to doom. Pretty fascinating.
So, right now, the language that was going to be deemed, the bill
under consideration, will, in fact, cover the TRICARE, because right
now it covers just TRICARE for Life.
{time} 1330
There's about $30 billion a year for TRICARE for those who are active
duty, or guardsmen, or reservists who are brought to active duty to
include their dependents. And with this $30 billion price tag, that's a
lot of money. Over 10 years, that's around $300 billion. I don't know
how we can exclude them, but we're going to bring them in.
What I'm about to ask of Mr. Levin is, we also have this commitment,
this commitment from the leadership, from the Speaker, from the leaders
of the dominant committees of Ed and Labor, and Ways and Means, the
Appropriations, and Energy and Commerce to protect the veterans
programs. Now in that language that's coming from the Senate to here
for which we're not going to get to vote on nor amend, it says that we
will take care of the chapter 17 veterans programs. Veterans programs.
But this chapter 17, there are other programs to survivors and
dependents which would not be covered. So their programs which
presently exist would not be under the minimum essential. Who are they?
That would be the widows, the survivors, and the orphaned children, to
include, for example, an agent orange Vietnam veteran whose child or
adult dependent has spina bifida would not be covered.
Parliamentary Inquiries
Mr. BUYER. I have a parliamentary inquiry.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Indiana will state his
inquiry.
Mr. BUYER. My parliamentary inquiry would be this: The bill that is
under suspension was dropped last night. We had to immediately respond
to all of this, and I have dropped a bill just in the last hour. I
apologize to my Democrat friends. I know you're just getting a chance
to look at this.
My parliamentary inquiry is, how would I be able to ask for an
immediate consideration of this bill under a suspension?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentleman speaking to a separate
measure other than the one that is before the House?
Mr. BUYER. That's correct. Yes, as a separate measure. How can I call
this bill to an immediate consideration?
[[Page H1765]]
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Speaker's policy for recognition
requires clearance with leadership on both sides before entertaining
such a request.
Mr. BUYER. At the conclusion of this bill, could I ask for unanimous
consent for immediate consideration of this bill to protect the
survivors and orphans of our veterans?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair is constrained to recognize for
such a request only if both leaderships have cleared it.
Mr. BUYER. Further parliamentary inquiry. Does that mean that at the
conclusion of this vote that the Chair would not recognize me for a
unanimous consent request?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman is correct.
Mr. BUYER. So the U.C. would not be in order.
Mr. LEVIN. Would the gentleman yield?
Mr. BUYER. I yield to the gentleman.
Mr. LEVIN. Let me suggest this: The provision that is in question
here or is before us doesn't take effect--the overall provision--until
2014. What our purpose is here today is not to correct a flaw but to
reaffirm so there could be zero questions. I would suggest this: That
we proceed--and I want to assure you, I think I can on behalf of
everyone concerned--that we will look at your bill, and we will work
with you, and if there's agreement, we will proceed expeditiously. So I
would hope that would work for you. I just wanted to assure you of our
good will on this. And if there is an issue that has to be considered,
we'll do that.
The problem right now is, it's impossible--we just received this--to
understand whether or not it might have an impact in terms of the
overall bill. The overall bill has to be scored. As you know, Mr.
Buyer, it's very technical. So again, let me suggest that we proceed
and give you the assurance that we will look at this and proceed
expeditiously.
Mr. BUYER. Reclaiming my time on the parliamentary inquiry, would it
be made in order under a unanimous consent request on a suspension that
the gentleman could amend? In other words, could I offer a unanimous
consent request to amend to include the general authority language that
is very similar to which the House had already passed previously under
the health bill?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The proponent would be allowed to withdraw,
amend, and re-offer.
Mr. BUYER. So the gentleman--I accept your good faith. You could
withdraw this bill. We are moving quickly, and you're correct that it
is highly technical. We only got to see this bill a few days ago. So
Mr. Skelton and Mr. McKeon, all of their staffs didn't get to fully
cover it. It's immediately dropped at midnight. We immediately bring it
to the floor. We then have to react.
Further parliamentary inquiry. As gentlemen, why don't we pause under
the rules? We can withdraw the suspension. We can work, and then the
gentleman can bring it back, in good faith. I would ask of the
gentleman under the comity of the House----
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will look to the majority manager
for any change in plans.
Mr. BUYER. All right. I would ask of the gentleman, would the
gentleman consider to withdraw the suspension to allow us to include
the general authority provisions and correct the errors in the bill?
Mr. LEVIN. Let me suggest the reason why I think we need to proceed
with this bill. We can accomplish what you want to accomplish by taking
up your bill separately. The purpose of this bill is not to correct a
flaw. The purpose of it simply is to reaffirm what should already be
clear. I don't think in this period of time that we could look at your
bill and be sure that it would have no impact in terms of the overall
legislation.
I know that this bill will have no such effect. I'm not sure of yours
because we've just received it. So let me just offer again in the best
of good faith that we will take a note that the----
Announcement by the Speaker pro tempore
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will note that the colloquy is on
the time of the gentleman from Indiana.
Mr. BUYER. All right. I'm going to reclaim my time. The gentleman's
position is that you have chosen not to withdraw the bill to correct
the errors, but you want to proceed.
Mr. LEVIN. I don't think it's a question of correcting an error.
Mr. BUYER. Let me reclaim my time, because we have a really large
distinction here. Because the bill that is about to be deemed--we don't
even have the right to vote on it. See, this is what's blowing my mind,
Mr. Levin. Those of us who have actually worn the uniform, we don't
fight for any bounty of our own. We fight for liberty, we fight for
freedom, the right to speak, the right to vote. And then we're going to
be denied the right to vote on a Senate bill, and nor do we have the
opportunity to amend? And to say that there are not errors when we move
this fast, we don't even allow the deliberative process to be used. I'm
pleading with you, Mr. Levin. I'm pleading with you. The bill that's
before us only covers TRICARE for life. I know this.
Announcement by the Speaker pro tempore
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will be reminded to address
the Chair.
Mr. BUYER. Mr. Speaker, I apologize. Mr. Levin, I apologize. I
drafted TRICARE for Life. I understand this program. This bill only
covers TRICARE for Life. So individuals who are enrolled in TRICARE--
it's not considered a minimum essential health program.
Now I know you didn't mean to do that. So let's get that corrected.
That's why you're going to do this bill. So then why don't we
absolutely make sure we correct chapter 17 to then protect survivors
and dependents? It's an error. I'm not going to stand here and say you
intentionally meant to leave out widows and orphans. I don't believe
that. But if you're going to correct it on TRICARE, let's take care of
the veterans too. I would just plead for the gentleman to stop and
pause while we're in consideration here. Let's amend this, and let's do
it right. That's my plea.
I will also let you know that we do things substantively. We also do
things politically. Ha. There's a response. Letters are coming in, and
emails are coming in right now from all the VSOs, and the Veterans
Service Organizations are pretty upset. Pretty upset. Whenever we move
fast, we're sloppy, and people get hurt in the process. This is not one
of our finest hours.
Announcement by the Speaker pro tempore
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to address the Chair
and not other Members in the second person.
The Chair will also remind all persons in the gallery that they are
here as guests of the House, and that any manifestation of approval or
disapproval of proceedings or other audible conversations is in
violation of the Rules of the House.
Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky. I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LEVIN. I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Mrs.
Davis).
Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I support the health reform
bill that this body will consider tomorrow, yet section 1501 of the
Senate bill needs to be modified to ensure that the insurance our brave
men and women in uniform have qualifies as ``minimum essential
coverage'' under the new law. I already believe that TRICARE and the
nonappropriated fund health plans will meet the minimum requirements
for individual health insurance coverage in the health care bill. Yet
like Mr. Skelton, I believe this legislation should explicitly state
that these health plans meet the minimum threshold.
As chairwoman of the Military Personnel Subcommittee, I am a strong
proponent of the TRICARE system and do not want that great benefit
threatened in any way by health care reform in the United States.
Fixing section 1501 of the Senate bill will help achieve this goal and
will remove any ambiguity for men and women in uniform and for my
colleagues who do not believe that the current bill goes far enough to
protect those who serve.
Mr. Speaker, this language to protect TRICARE originally passed the
House Education and Labor Committee on a bipartisan basis. I remember
it. I was there. I would ask my colleagues on the other side of the
aisle to put aside politics for this one vote and help pass
[[Page H1766]]
a measure that will allow our men and women in uniform to focus on
their mission, not their health insurance. I urge a ``yes'' vote on
this measure.
Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time
is remaining on our side?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Kentucky has 8 minutes
remaining, and the gentleman from Michigan has 14\1/2\ minutes
remaining.
Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Now I would like to
yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Stearns), an Air
Force veteran and another distinguished member of the Veterans
Committee.
Mr. STEARNS. I thank the distinguished chairman. The bottom line--
this is the bottom line--the Senate language in the health care bill
does not protect VA and Department of Defense health care systems from
interference by other Federal agencies, such as Health and Human
Services. We need to have the Buyer-McKeon bill part of this package,
or you're going to leave out a whole segment of veterans who are under
TRICARE, not to mention survivors and dependents who are covered under
the CHAMPVA.
This is extremely important to American veterans, so I urge you,
Democrats who are in the majority, to reconsider Mr. Buyer's simple
request to make part of your bill today, immediately, as much as
possible, to amend it so that we include the Buyer language which is
H.R. 4894. It's not a major thing to do here. We can do that.
Mr. Skelton here earlier said that he's against the health care bill.
He emphatically said he's going to vote ``no.'' I understand that. He
feels that the Democrat health care bill is not something he can
support. He's chairman of the Armed Services Committee. He understands
that passage of this rule that we're going to talk about later will
deem passage of the entire health care bill in America. But then here
we are, trying in desperation because this is a farce, this health care
bill, because it strips TRICARE from the military veterans. It hurts
survivors and dependents.
Now in a charade here of a farce, they're trying to amend a bill that
has never passed. Think of that. This bill that we're going to vote on,
the Skelton bill, is amending a bill that has not even passed. So I
even question the constitutionality and the procedures here. The health
care bill is not going to protect Department of Defense military people
under TRICARE and veterans.
Now why is this occurring? I think we realize it is because the
Democrats moved too quickly, and they're penalizing our veterans. So
the chairman of the Armed Services Committee is against it. More
importantly, he's here with this bill, and I think all of us should
understand that without passage of the Buyer-McKeon bill, which is H.R.
4894--the bill has been dropped--to amend the patient protection and
affordable care to ensure appropriate treatment of Department of
Veterans Affairs and Department of Defense health programs--this is a
simple statement, but it has huge implications.
So Mr. Levin, I urge you to reconsider and to make sure that part of
this McKeon bill has the language of the Buyer-McKeon. Again, I will
just close by saying that the reason why we're here today is because
the bill was put together improperly, and it's just an affront to our
veterans, to our military retirees that they are going to be affected
by this health care bill.
Announcement by the Speaker pro tempore
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are once again reminded to address
the Chair and not others in the second person.
{time} 1345
Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the
distinguished gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Buyer).
Mr. BUYER. Mr. Speaker, in consultation with the chairman of the Ways
and Means Committee, a gentleman that I respect, I think the best
approach is we will vote on your bill and ask the minority leader, and
approach the majority leader and the Speaker, and you can do your due
diligence on the policy aspects to make sure that things can get
corrected and then maybe we can call for immediate consideration of the
Buyer-McKeon bill. I think that is a good approach.
I yield to the gentleman.
Mr. LEVIN. I agree.
Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will once again remind Members to
speak through the Chair and not in the second person.
Mr. LEVIN. I reserve the balance of my time. Do I have the right to
close?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Yes.
Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky. As we revisit this event, we are correcting an
egregious wrong that was done by oversight to not fully cover our
veterans and those on active duty and their families. The fact that
TRICARE would not fall into the so-called minimally accepted coverage
leads me back to the false standard that was set in the beginning on
this bill in the first place.
I was, among other things in the military, an assault helicopter
pilot. One of the things that we learned as young aviators is that
accidents normally didn't happen because of one big thing. Normally an
accident would happen, and several of my close friends paid the
ultimate price in this, was because several little things would begin
to pile up, small events, things unseen. The faster the environment
began to process, the more they would pile up, and eventually they
became uncontrollable. Not noticing power, not noticing air speed, not
noticing their rate of descent, their altitude, their visual
references, lots of things can come into play.
The bottom line is we are doing the same thing now, except we are
doing it with one of the largest and most sweeping bills in the history
of this country. We are rushing headlong without even a week; 72 hours
for a bill this big, give me a break. Let's think about the reality of
what we are doing, rushing headlong to do the largest transfer of power
to the executive branch in the history of the United States.
This is about turning us into a different Nation. This is about
stepping beyond article I of the Constitution to deem. To deem what? We
are fixing a small mistake. I guarantee you, there are hundreds of
others. Deeming actually is pronouncing something that isn't as if it
were done, for all practical purposes, and it was designed from a
legislative perspective for simple corrections. Let us deem everybody
good health; that has about the same effect in the eyes of the American
people. If we are dealing with veterans, let us deem world peace so
there won't be any more risks internationally.
You see the absurdity of this argument presented over and over and
over. And for the thousands of Americans outside this building, while
we stand in here trying to work together to fix a small piece, there
are hundreds and hundreds of other things piling up.
Remember what the Speaker said: the Speaker said we have to pass this
bill so we can find out what's in it. In the name of heaven, shouldn't
we know what is in it before it even comes to this floor for a vote? I
demand to know the justice in that, in ramming a piece of legislation
through here that is going to change the lives of our children and our
grandchildren.
You ask the people dying in hospitals in England, you ask the people
who wait 18 months for bypass surgery, you ask the veterans who are yet
to come forward who will not have health care because of this on some
technical fix. We are hiring over 100,000 new government bureaucrats
and not making the changes the rest of the country uses. And every time
in the Ways and Means Committee we tried to offer those changes, they
were rejected. Think about this for a moment.
I don't want the most important thing that we are handling in this
administration to become a train wreck waiting to happen when we see
all of the events beginning to pile up. We need to slow the overall
bill down. The fact that we would have to do this, the fact that there
are thousands of people demonstrating tells us that there is more to
this than simply giving people health care.
I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Florida (Mr.
Stearns).
Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Speaker, there is something else that is going on
here, too. Okay, so the Skelton bill passes without the Buyer-McKeon.
Okay, then the health care bill comes tomorrow. We vote on it tomorrow
night, and it
[[Page H1767]]
passes. But still, the veterans will still be without care because this
bill that is passing here has to go to the Senate. The Senate could
make some changes and then it comes back to the House. So you will have
a health care bill out there standing by itself that has passed, gone
to the President, signed into law that does not protect veterans on
TRICARE. You should be very concerned about that, and I think the
American people should be concerned that our veterans, who are in two
wars today, are not going to be protected because you are delaying the
enforcement of the rigorous understanding of what this bill is about.
So just simply passing this today under suspension will not mean that
the veterans are protected. It still has to go to the Senate and comes
back to the House before it is signed by the President.
Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, I will go ahead and close with
these final remarks.
Next year will be the 30th anniversary of my graduation from the
United States Military Academy. When I am back there seeing these men
and women who have served this country in so many distinguished ways,
through times of peace and war and turbulence, the one thing that I
want to be able to look in their eyes and say that we did as a
Congress, not simply me, is that we served their needs, their family
needs, the needs of their soldiers, the needs of veterans in general.
And it is clear from the overall legislation that we are seeking to
amend before it even becomes law, although I think that is
constitutionally in question if we are not actually going to vote on
the Senate bill, we need to slow this process down and stop the Senate
bill from being forced through this House, this reconciliation process,
and go back to square one and do this step by step and get it right the
first time rather than having to make corrections.
I thank the chairman of the Armed Services Committee and the chairman
of the Ways and Means Committee for bringing this critical fix forward.
There are many more. Let us get to those.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
I want to make two points clearly and very forcefully: veterans and
veterans' health are protected and will be protected. We are glad to
bring our record before the world where this party that I belong to has
been in terms of protecting veterans and veterans' health. I just want
to say a word about that because I have been here now for some years;
and a few years ago the party that I belong to, when we had the power,
took the steps to make sure that the health of veterans was protected,
indeed, enhanced. What we did was to pass billions of dollars' worth in
programs to make sure that veterans in this country were protected as
to their health care needs. That is absolutely clear. No veterans need
to be worried about their health care. No one covered by TRICARE needs
to be worried about whether that will be in effect. No one.
This is done simply to reassure in terms of the language. It is not
to fix a flaw. It is to reassure. Indeed, it is being brought for the
very reason that we feared that some people might decide to misstate
what the reality was. The reality is that we are simply reassuring.
There is no flaw to fix, period.
So no one in any place, any veteran or anybody and their family needs
to worry about our dedication or the impact of this legislation. That
is point one.
Number two, I think what is being done here, what is being said here
is pretty clear. The argument isn't really over veterans' health. We
are all dedicated to sustaining that. It isn't over TRICARE. We are
dedicated to improving TRICARE wherever possible. What we hear on the
other side instead are speeches and words about the reconciliation
bill. You don't like it.
Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky. Would the gentleman yield?
Mr. LEVIN. I am not sure that I want to carry on much longer a debate
over the health care bill, but sure.
Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky. I would point out that TRICARE for life was
excised from the Senate bill.
Mr. LEVIN. Look, the Senate bill, we wanted to be 100 percent sure
that nobody would misstate its impact. So don't misstate it. That's the
purpose of this.
Instead, after you talk about veterans' health, you begin to talk
about the reconciliation bill. Now we will debate that tomorrow, but we
should not use any question about coverage for veterans as a reason to
attack the reconciliation bill. I support it. I think it will have a
major positive impact. You used all kinds of words about a different
Nation, about rushing headlong. That has nothing to do with this bill.
I think you are completely wrong about this being a different Nation.
You raised it, so I will say a few words.
What this is going to do is continue the path of this Nation, to make
sure that health care can be afforded, to make sure that health care is
spread to everybody. It is not a different Nation; it is continuing the
best in our Nation. And so we are not rushing headlong. We have been
talking about health care for a century in this country. I said at the
Rules Committee, my first political experience as I remember it was as
a kid passing out leaflets for the dad of John Dingell. His father had
introduced a health care bill how many decades ago, and before him,
others. Going back to Teddy Roosevelt, no huge radical.
So now decades later we come to a moment when we can step up to the
plate, and you call it a different Nation. No, I say it is in the best
traditions of the United States of America. And so this is simply a
bill to reassure; don't use it as an opportunity to talk about
something else. We want to say clearly to the veterans of this country
and to the families of those veterans, to everybody who is part of that
family, that their health care is going to be protected. That is the
purpose of this legislation.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin) that the House suspend the rules
and pass the bill, H.R. 4887, as amended.
The question was taken.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds
being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be
postponed.
____________________