[Congressional Record Volume 156, Number 42 (Saturday, March 20, 2010)]
[House]
[Pages H1778-H1783]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
RECOGNIZING MILITARY AVIATORS WHO ESCAPED CAPTURE
Ms. BORDALLO. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to
the resolution (H. Res. 925) expressing the sense of the House of
Representatives regarding the meritorious service performed by aviators
in the United States Armed Forces who were shot down over, or otherwise
forced to land in, hostile territory yet evaded enemy capture or were
captured but subsequently escaped, as amended.
The Clerk read the title of the resolution.
The text of the resolution is as follows:
H. Res. 925
Whereas aviators in the Armed Forces, including pilots,
navigators, bombardiers, weapons control officers, and other
aircraft crew members, have served the United States with
great courage and distinction in every major conflict during
the 20th and 21st centuries;
Whereas thousands of aviators in the Armed Forces have been
forced down while performing their missions, as a result of
hostile action, mechanical failures, or other problems;
Whereas many of these aviators overcame long odds and great
hardships to return to their units and resume their service
to the United States;
Whereas some of these aviators tried to evade enemy forces,
but were captured, and some of these aviators were compelled
to endure arduous confinement, retaliation, and even death as
a result of their efforts to evade capture or escape;
Whereas these aviators faced the added responsibility of
maintaining the secrecy of their escape and evasion methods
in order to protect the lives of people who assisted them and
other aviators; and
Whereas the need to maintain secrecy initially may have
prevented these aviators from being publically recognized for
their meritorious service in avoiding capture, in escaping
from captivity, or for their efforts to escape: Now,
therefore, be it
Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of
Representatives that--
(1) aviators in the United States Armed Forces who, as a
result of hostile action, mechanical failures, or other
problems, were forced to evade or escape enemy capture, were
captured but subsequently escaped to return to their units
and resume their service to the United States, or were
compelled to endure arduous confinement, retaliation, and
even death as a result of their efforts to evade capture or
escape should be publically recognized for their
extraordinary service; and
(2) the Secretaries of the military departments should
consider these aviators for appropriate recognition within
their branch of the Armed Forces.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from
Guam (Ms. Bordallo) and the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Lamborn) each
will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Guam.
General Leave
Ms. BORDALLO. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks
on the resolution under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentlewoman from Guam?
There was no objection.
Ms. BORDALLO. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
I rise in support of House Resolution 925, which recognizes aviators
in the United States Armed Forces who were forced to evade or escape
enemy capture, were captured but subsequently escaped, or were
compelled to endure arduous confinement, retaliation, and even death as
a result of their efforts to evade capture or escape. I want to thank
my colleague from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio) for introducing this measure.
As a member of the House Committee on Armed Services, I am honored to
recognize the aviators of the Armed Forces who have valiantly served
the United States in every major conflict during the 20th and 21st
century. Aviators, including pilots, navigators, bombardiers, weapons
control officers, and other aircraft crew members, with fierce courage
and distinction face the threat of being forced down each time they
take to the skies.
Madam Speaker, House Resolution 925 recognizes those downed aviators
that have not only miraculously survived unexpected flight termination,
but also have confronted additional dangers escaping or attempting to
escape enemy capture on the ground. It also expresses the sense of the
House that those downed aviators that were tortured or killed as a
result of their efforts to evade capture or escape should be publicly
recognized for their extraordinary service. So in honor of these men
and women who have selflessly served our Nation, many without the
encouragement of public recognition, I urge my colleagues to vote
``yes'' to this resolution.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LAMBORN. Madam Speaker, I too rise in support of House Resolution
925, which seeks recognition for aviators who, as a result of hostile
action or other causes, were forced to escape and evade their potential
captors. Every military aviator who begins a combat mission recognizes
and prepares for the possibility that hostile actions or other events
will compel the aviator to escape and evade capture.
[[Page H1779]]
Thousands of American aviators have faced that daunting task. Some
overcame long odds and great hardships to return to their units to
resume their service. Others tried to evade enemy forces but were
captured, suffering arduous confinement, torture, and even death.
Except for a few, the specific identities of those thousands have
mostly faded from American memory, and many were not recognized for
their determined efforts to escape and evade. That is why this
resolution is important. These aviators deserve recognition. That is
why I call on all Members to support this bill.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. BORDALLO. Madam Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to
my friend and colleague, and the sponsor of this resolution, the
gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio).
Mr. DeFAZIO. I thank the gentlelady.
The previous resolution had to do with the anniversary of Iwo Jima.
This is something that would actually go to a number of wars and
conflicts that the U.S. Armed Forces have been involved in, but I will
focus a bit on a veteran of World War II in terms of the need for this
recognition and resolution.
Oddly enough somehow, the Defense Department has overlooked the
valiant service of many who were previously in the Army Air Corps, now
in the United States Air Force, or in the flying arms of the United
States Army or the Marines and Navy and their sacrifice when they have
been shot down behind enemy lines and not captured and imprisoned, but
actually managed to evade escape, sometimes allying themselves with
resistance movements, other times just depriving the enemy of the
victory of capturing a downed U.S. pilot, bombardier, airman of any
sort.
This first came to my attention when I was approached by a gentleman
I have known a number of years in Eugene, Oregon, Don Fisher. And he
came to me with a request I hear from a lot of vets, which is, ``Hey,
could you help me get my service records?'' We had the infamous fire in
St. Louis which burned up so many veterans' records. And we are often
asked to help reconstitute their records, generally for benefit
purposes, but sometimes for other purposes. And I said, ``Sure, Don.''
I mean that's really pretty routine. ``We can help you with that.'' He
said, ``This one isn't quite so routine.'' And I said, ``Well, how is
that?'' And he said, ``Well, I was shot down over occupied France in a
B-17. I came down behind enemy lines, and I was harbored by French
families who were friendly to the allies. I cooperated and worked with
the resistance and evaded escape until D-day.'' And on D-day he
revealed himself to British forces and was first allowed to send a
message home. But then when turned over to the U.S. forces, they had
questions about whether he really was a U.S. aviator, and he was rather
extensively interrogated.
So what he wanted was to get his interrogation files. He said, ``I
really don't remember everything that happened to me when I was behind
enemy lines.'' He said, ``I'm sure when I was a young man I had a
better memory. And I would like to have that for my family and
myself.'' I said, ``Well, sure. We'll help.'' It's either still in the
depths of some classification system somewhere or it was declassified,
so we could never find that file.
But that brought me an interest in him and his organization. There is
an organization of what they call evaders. In this case they are World
War II. Many of them are becoming quite elderly. They are going to have
a reunion in the not too distant future out at the Air Force Academy in
Colorado.
I took on the task to try to get them some recognition. So this is
actually two parts. One is expressing the sense of Congress for
admiration for their extraordinary service. And again, this does not
just extend to World War II. It would be Korea, Vietnam, and Iraq,
Afghanistan, other conflicts and other involvements by U.S. forces.
Anybody who has been in this situation.
Secondly, I am recommending strongly to the Secretary of Defense that
a special ribbon, award, or medal be developed to recognize these
activities and encourage these activities, because there will be future
U.S. aviators who will be in the same position. And we want them to
know that we honored their forebears, those who came before them who
for years hid and operated behind enemy lines and then came back to
freedom with our victories.
It is almost exactly 47 years since he was shot down. It's a story
that is not totally extraordinary. I know other World War II veterans.
But I just recount it briefly. His plane was shot down. They bailed
out. He doesn't remember much because they were at a pretty high
altitude. He blacked out. The next thing he knew he was hanging from a
tree, and the German fighter pilot circled him. And he thought for sure
he was going to be strafed. Instead, the German fighter pilot saluted
him and flew off.
He then managed to get extricated from his harness, and after that
was sheltered by the French, and ultimately became associated with
French resistance, and as I say, met the liberators in Paris when we
liberated Paris. So this is one of thousands of extraordinary stories
and acts of valor by our soldiers.
I just hope strongly that we can get unanimous agreement on this
resolution and restrict the debate to the subject of this resolution to
honor these people for their extraordinary service, and move on.
Mr. LAMBORN. Madam Speaker, the service performed by aviators in the
U.S. Armed Forces is indeed meritorious. They have fought bravely and
risked much to take care of our country. Indeed, they deserve the
recognition and care for their sacrifice that this resolution embodies.
As members of the military, their health care falls under the TRICARE
system, which as Representative Skelton mentioned earlier in this day,
must be addressed in any health care bill before Congress.
{time} 1745
We must make sure that any bill we pass in this area gives them the
benefits that they deserve.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. BORDALLO. Madam Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. LAMBORN. Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from
Florida (Mr. Posey).
Mr. POSEY. I thank the gentleman from Colorado for yielding.
Madam Speaker, I applaud the sponsors, cosponsors, and everyone in
the body who is taking the time to support the heroes that we're
discussing today. I would also like to take this opportunity to remind
the body, as my colleague just has, that we must keep the TRICARE
promised them for life as well. And while we're on the TRICARE/health
care subject, I'd like to stress my strong objections to the health
care legislation, the unprecedented abuses, and perhaps
unconstitutional process through which it's being considered.
The American people are telling us, either in letters or calls, in
every poll that they don't want it. Besides the fact of Social Security
is unsustainable, Medicare is unsustainable, and only a few doctors
even accept Medicaid as it is now. There are other top 10 reasons to
reject it.
It raises taxes by over $550 billion. It adds over a trillion more
dollars to the national debt, kills over 2 million more jobs, and
drives up the cost of medical insurance; gives the IRS unprecedented
power over the lives of the American people; replaces your doctor with
Federal bureaucrats to make critical decisions about your medical care;
cuts Medicare by more than a half a trillion dollars, and of course
Congress is exempt; provides for the largest expansion of abortion
coverage since Roe v. Wade, including taxpayer-funded abortions. It
will bankrupt States through billions in unfunded mandates; force
American citizens to foot the bill for health care for illegal aliens,
inasmuch as it fails to include strict enforcement; is the result of a
flawed process, having been written in secret out of the view of C-SPAN
cameras and filled with backroom deals and vote buying.
We're a Nation of laws. Laws are not supposed to be ignored when they
are inconvenient or simply pose a hurdle to achieving certain agendas.
We teach our children to play by the rules, but this Congress is
teaching them something very different.
How can we expect the American people to obey the laws Congress
passes when Congress won't obey its own rules? It is respect for the
rule of law that has distinguished the United
[[Page H1780]]
States from the banana republics and authoritarian regimes.
Indeed, millions of Americans, including those we're honoring today,
have fought and even have died for this country; yet this bill, this
process grossly compromises that principle. Clearly, Congress isn't
listening to the American people and is once again ignoring their
voices.
There is an old political axiom that says any time you promise to
take from Peter to pay Paul, one thing usually happens--Paul votes for
you. And that is where we are right here, right now today in Congress.
This is exactly what ultimately leads democracies to fail, and this
bill, if enacted into law, will greatly undermine the future of our
Republic, the greatest Nation in the history of the world that these
men and women fought and died for.
It has been said democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of
government; it can only exist until the voters discover they can vote
themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the
majority usually votes for the candidates promising them the most
benefits. Therefore, the average age of the world's greatest
civilizations has been about 200 years.
These nations have progressed through this sequence: from bondage to
spiritual faith, from spiritual faith to great courage, from courage to
liberty, from liberty to abundance, from abundance to selfishness, from
selfishness to apathy, from apathy to dependence, and from dependency
back into bondage.
It is not difficult to see where we are right now on that scale, but
what is true is it's frightening. It's frightening that some people
think our government is some kind of cosmic Santa Claus who cannot
fail. It isn't--and it can fail if we are not good stewards of the gift
our Forefathers gave to us. We must not allow the American experiment
at representative self-government to fail on our watch.
If our Founders wanted to live like Europeans, they would not have
come here in the first place or they would have turned the ships around
and headed home. But they didn't. They wanted a land of opportunity,
not a land of government-administered, cradle-to-the-grave
entitlements.
Americans don't want to go down this path toward future socialism,
increasingly losing power to government. Vice President Biden said it
best yesterday when he said, if this bill is passed, government will
``control'' health care in America. His words not mine.
No one believes the status quo in our Nation's health care system is
acceptable. There are many areas where we can find agreement, and we
must move forward to fix those problems. The American people deserve
better. Let them know that we know we don't work for Congress. Congress
works for them by defeating this bill.
Ms. BORDALLO. Madam Speaker, I would like to inquire as to how much
time is remaining.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from Guam has 12\1/2\
minutes. The gentleman from Colorado has 14 minutes.
Ms. BORDALLO. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Garamendi).
Mr. GARAMENDI. I grew up in the forties and fifties, and I remember
the men and women that came back from the war, some gravely wounded,
carrying those wounds the rest of their lives, and some having survived
but survived behind enemy lines. This resolution honors those that
fought in so many different ways, and particularly those behind enemy
lines and were unable to really be recognized for the extraordinary
contributions they made to the war effort. And it's perfectly
appropriate.
What is not appropriate is what our colleagues on the Republican side
have done with this debate and with the previous debate. We're honoring
our soldiers. We're honoring our men and women that have fought. We
will soon be debating the health care issue, and in the appropriate
time, we should be taking that up. But to somehow demean, to somehow
demean the courage, the resolution, and the extraordinary sacrifice
made by these people is just plain wrong.
I would ask our colleagues to set it aside. In a few moments we will
pick up the health care debate, and then I would be delighted to join
you in that debate. But now let's focus on those who have served this
country in time of war.
Mr. LAMBORN. I would say that it's always the proper time to talk
about issues that impact our freedom, and we have momentous issues here
in Congress at times that deal directly upon our freedom.
With that in mind, I would like to yield 3\1/2\ minutes to my
colleague and friend who is an Army veteran from the State of Michigan
(Mr. Rogers).
Mr. ROGERS of Michigan. I commend Madeleine Bordallo on the work on
this bill, and it does sadden many of us that we have to come here
today and talk about an issue that is so pressing, an issue that
affects 310 million Americans. And it's hard to find that time to get
out and talk about that issue that will take away health care from
millions, that will tax health care for millions, that will raid the
Social Security trust fund, that will actually cut a half a trillion
dollars out of the Medicare budget. But there are things in this bill
that I think the other side does not want to talk about that is in
here, and that is exactly why we feel compelled to come here to offer
amendments at the Rules Committee to get this thing at least where the
American people can have some faith that you're going to have an honest
debate.
The number of sweetheart and sleazy deals in this bill, the bill that
this Chamber will vote on tomorrow, is sickening. It pits one American
against another American. It pits one neighbor against another
neighbor, and it happens time and time and time again in your
legislation.
If you're a retired UAW worker living next door to a retired tool and
die machinist, guess what? There is a special provision where you get
offsets for the increase in your premiums for a UAW worker but the tool
and die machinists get nothing except a higher tax bill. It's wrong. It
was a special provision tucked in this bill.
If you're a senior citizen in Florida, there is a special provision
that says your Medicare Advantage stays intact, but if you're a senior
citizen living in Ohio or New York or Michigan, guess what? Not for
you. You get treated differently. You lose your Medicare Advantage.
It's wrong. It's sleazy. It's un-American.
If you're a UAW worker in Michigan, you're going to get a higher tax
on your insurance plan. If you're a longshoreman in New York City, you
don't pay the higher tax on your insurance plan. It's unseemly, sleazy,
and it's wrong.
These are provisions tucked into this bill we can only assume to get
to the magic number to pass on this floor.
You know, if you're a banker in Michigan, you no longer, after this
bill is passed, will be able to make a private student loan. That is
right. But if you're a banker from North Dakota, guess what? You will
get to make a private student loan. It's un-American. And each and
every one of these sleazy deals ought to be brought to this floor and
eliminated from this bill.
We will have that opportunity in Rules Committee. We will see the
commitment of this Chamber to be honest and transparent, not to mention
the fact that we will stop the Social Security raid to pay for a bill
that adds a trillion dollars to the deficit.
And do you realize, Madam Speaker, why the impact of this is so
important? Because this administration has had more deficit spending
than every other President of the United States combined. It is
shocking and it's breathtaking, and the arrogance of this Chamber to
bring such an un-American bill with special sweetheart, sleazy deals
tucked in and arm-twisting to make it happen is wrong.
I know that the soldiers I served with fought for a unified country,
a country that believed in liberty and personal responsibility and
limited government. I know that today we ought to stand for that, too,
and we ought to ask all of this to come to light and put those
amendments as a part of the bill and clean up our act in Congress.
Ms. BORDALLO. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to my friend and
colleague, the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio).
Mr. DeFAZIO. Again, I wish that the Republican side had been able to
wait until later this evening during their 2
[[Page H1781]]
hours to raise their concerns about health care, but there are some
things that merit response in the interest of truth and the American
way.
The gentleman before me is extraordinary. This President has deficits
totaled larger than every other President combined? No. Actually, yes,
we do have a record deficit this last year. Most of it is inherited
from George Bush. But it's true, now, that that's a very high year.
But George Bush is the one who doubled the national debt and did
accumulate more debt than every other President before him, before the
collapse of Wall Street because of the deregulatory agenda of the Bush
administration and the Republican Party--every ounce of which I fought
on the floor of this House--which brought America to its knees, which
dissolved people's savings and 401(k)s and everything else for greedy
bankers and investors and others. And the Republicans put that agenda
in place when they controlled the House, the Senate, and the White
House with their deregulatory approach.
So it's not even factually true. Yes, I'm very concerned about the
astounding deficits, and we've got to deal with that, but George Bush
doubled the debt. There is a record 1-year increase. It does not exceed
even the amount of debt George Bush accumulated. He may be looking into
the future, but it's not factually true.
To the gentleman before him who talked about bankrupting people
because we're going to give them access to quality, affordable health
care, I wish he would tell that to the woman from my district who I
talked to who got cancer, had an individual policy, and guess what? She
paid her premiums, and when it became time for renewal, the company
said, Sorry. We don't renew policies of people who have cancer. Thank
you very much for your premiums.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
{time} 1800
Ms. BORDALLO. I yield the gentleman 1 additional minute.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Or the gentleman I met in the unemployment office. Yeah,
he had rights to purchase his health care under COBRA. But the cost of
his health care was three-quarters of his unemployment benefit. His
wife was deathly ill. This is a tough guy. He cried in public in that
office. That won't happen again if we pass this legislation tomorrow.
That gentleman will not be forced to choose between keeping his home,
feeding his family, and getting his wife needed health care. Under your
plan, that continues, status quo. You guys are the pets of the
insurance industry, and you know it.
And then the woman that needed a double mastectomy and they had a
special team from her insurance company. That was great. But their job
was to find a way to get her off the plan. They reviewed her history.
They found she had been to a dermatologist for acne. They said she
hadn't reported it. They rescinded her policy. And a gentleman from
your side of the aisle had to threaten that insurance company publicly
to get her reinstated. This law will prohibit that in the future.
We need to take on the health insurance industry in America and
prevent these abuses, and you guys did nothing about that under your
charge, and your proposals for the future will do nothing about that.
Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman is reminded to address his
remarks to the Chair.
Mr. LAMBORN. Madam Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from
Michigan (Mr. Rogers).
Mr. ROGERS of Michigan. Finally, some spirited debate on an issue
that will impact 310 million Americans. The problem with your anecdotal
stories is, you are going to say that 85 percent of the system that is
working right and having insurance are going to be punished and
rationed in health care to fix the 15 percent. That's the travesty. You
won't have one tough guy crying; you will have millions and millions of
Americans crying for losing their health care.
And on the deficit, to set it straight, the year prior to the
Democrats taking over control of this Congress it was a $270 billion
deficit. The year leading up to their takeover of this Chamber, $160
billion. And guess what? The very next year, $1.4 trillion. That's your
problem. That's your plan. You need to deal with the facts.
Ms. BORDALLO. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to my friend and
colleague, the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Inslee).
Mr. INSLEE. The purpose of this resolution is to honor the aviators
who have done such courageous duty for this country. And they have. And
I think one of the things they have done because of their sacrifices is
that they have always given America a chance to become a more perfect
union. And I think the language in our founding documents of working
towards a more perfect union suggests that we're a country that's
always looking for an opportunity to get just a little bit better. And
we now have a bill we will be voting on tomorrow that does give America
a chance, not to solve all our problems, but to get a little bit better
when it comes to health care.
And I just want to, in the context of an aviator, suggest what that
may mean. Let's take an aviator that goes to France, serves in a B-17
like so many courageous aviators did, is shot down, rescued, prisoner-
of-war, returns, starts a little business, raises a family back home,
survives World War II, raises let's say his daughter, she grows up to
maturity, maybe has a kid. He is a proud grandfather like many of these
aviators are.
What could happen to his daughter right now in the current situation
of the law? What could happen is she could have insurance, she could
have a good job, she could be taking care of her family, and then she
can develop cancer. And do you know what this side of the aisle wants
to allow to continue to be the law of the United States of America?
They want to let the aviator's daughter to be able to be canceled in
her insurance policy because she develops cancer.
Let's assume the grandchild of the aviator develops diabetes and gets
to maturity and wants to go out and buy an insurance policy. Guess what
this side of the aisle wants to allow to be continued practiced in
America? They, who are going to be voting en masse, en masse, against
health care reform, against this step forward tomorrow, they will be
voting tomorrow to allow the aviator's grandchild to be denied
insurance because she developed diabetes.
Now I question whether American aviators who fight wars proudly think
it's really up to American standards to allow the children and
grandchildren of aviators to be denied coverage because they developed
illness. We don't think that is good enough for America. We think we
deserve better. And what we will be doing tomorrow is voting for a
provision that will give the families of aviators the right, in fact,
to be treated fairly in America.
Now I know many people, they have argued this is somehow a government
takeover of health care. I've thought about that, and I can understand
people don't want a government takeover of health care. But it is
fundamental. What this does is it changes the relationship between
Americans and the insurance industry. And that's a relationship, and
the rules of that relationship do need to change because we need to
give Americans more choice. We need to give them more freedom. We need
to give them more protection against some of the practices of the
insurance companies. And that's what we will be voting to do tomorrow.
So I say let's honor some aviators. Let's honor their families by
giving their families the right to have health care even though they
have asthma, even though they have diabetes, even though they have
Parkinson's. Whether they are Republicans or Democrats, or red and blue
States, all Americans deserve to be able to have insurance in this
country. That's what we're going to do tomorrow.
Mr. LAMBORN. Madam Speaker, there are some important, vital, and
principled reasons why those of us on this side of the aisle will be
opposing the health care plan should it come to a vote tomorrow. And
just briefly let me recap these. It raises taxes by $570 billion over
10 years. It will cost the taxpayers $1.2 trillion, not to mention the
so-called doc fix of about $371 billion, a massive increase of
government spending. It's also a takeover by the
[[Page H1782]]
government, a dramatic step away from personal, private coverage and
choice to a government-run system that will end up rationing care. It's
unconstitutional. There is nowhere in the Constitution that says the
government has the power to require every single person to go out and
buy insurance whether they want to or not. It fails to adequately
address illegal immigrants through no enforceable means of citizen
verification. It funds abortion. There's lack of tort reform. It forces
Americans out of their current plans. It increases premiums. It will
increase personal health expenditures whether people can afford it or
not. It bends the curve of government spending in the future in the
wrong direction. It constitutes a massive permanent government takeover
of the private student loan industry. That's 30,000 jobs right there.
It is chock-full of special deals, from the Bismarck bank job to the
Louisiana purchase and others. It does not factor in market risks
regarding defaults on student loans.
So for all those reasons, Madam Speaker, we should be opposing that
bill when it comes, if it comes, to a vote tomorrow.
At this point, I would like to yield 3 minutes to my friend and
colleague from the State of Ohio who is also a member of the Armed
Services Committee that I serve on with him, Representative Turner.
Mr. TURNER. Madam Speaker, while we are debating this bill, Americans
are concerned about the pending health care legislation. Americans know
that advances in medical research are a strength of the American health
care system and should be encouraged instead of restricted by
additional layers of redtape.
Unfortunately, this misguided health care legislation would reduce
Medicare payments to CAT scan and MRI providers. It also creates a 2.9
percent excise tax on medical device manufacturers. The lowered
payments and increased taxes can reduce the availability of new and
advancing medical imaging technology. This will inhibit future
innovation in medical research and will delay or deny patient access to
new and valuable technologies.
Continued innovation that improves patient-centered medicine is vital
to the long-term availability of health care services in America. This
is just one example of the number of provisions buried in this pending
health care bill.
The unintended consequences of lowering payments and increasing taxes
will constrain future research and development and hinder our doctors'
ability to deliver the best quality care to our patients. This pending
health care legislation will end up restricting the innovation and
invention which is at the heart of the American economy. And for that
reason, I strongly oppose the bill, and we should be debating that bill
today.
Ms. BORDALLO. Madam Speaker, could I inquire about how much time we
have left?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from Guam has 5 minutes
remaining. The gentleman from Colorado has 6\1/2\ minutes remaining.
Ms. BORDALLO. Madam Speaker, I would like to yield 2 minutes to my
friend and colleague, the gentleman from California (Mr. Garamendi).
Mr. GARAMENDI. A moment ago, I asked, Madam Speaker, if we could
focus on the issue before us, which is certainly a meritorious issue.
But apparently our colleagues from the Republican Party want to debate
health care so, okay, guys, let's debate health care. A moment ago, the
speaker from wherever you were from spoke about somehow limiting the
MRIs. You are absolutely right. The legislation does limit MRIs that
are ordered by a doctor that owns the MRI machine. There is blatant
fraud going on, and there's blatant overuse and payments by the
taxpayers to the Medicare and Medicaid program as a result of
physician-owned practices, pharmaceuticals, pharmacies, as well as the
MRIs and hospitals, and this legislation does limit it. You're quite
right. We must limit that kind of overuse.
I've been at this a long time. I was the chairman of the health
committee in California in the 1980s when we limited it. I was the
insurance commissioner. I've seen these pernicious practices over and
over.
Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair would remind Members to address
their remarks to the Chair and not to others in the second person.
Mr. LAMBORN. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to my friend and
colleague from Alabama, Representative Aderholt.
Mr. ADERHOLT. Madam Speaker, I want to rise today to voice my strong
opposition to the massive health care bill that is scheduled to come
before the U.S. House of Representatives in the next 24 hours.
Backdoor deals to coerce Members to support the government takeover
of health care is something the American people completely disagree
with, and they're making their voice known loud and clear. However, the
President and the Democrat leadership of this body are forcing us to
vote on this bill.
In many countries, people have no free speech. But in America we do.
So on behalf of all the families in north Alabama that I represent, I
say to my colleagues in Congress, reject this massive takeover of
health care that we are to vote on in the next 24 hours.
To make this legislation even worse, no amendment is being allowed to
stop abortions from being federally funded. Members of the majority are
not even being allowed to bring up a vote on abortion, one of the
issues that means most to Americans. Businesses will be crippled with
new taxes, and they won't be able to hire out-of-work Americans.
America has never gone down this road, Madam Speaker, the road for
government-controlled health care. And never in our history have we
forced individuals to actually purchase insurance. As I was walking
into the Chamber this afternoon to cast my votes, there were literally
thousands of people outside the Capitol. They were shouting their
opposition to this bill, and it was loud and clear.
Madam Speaker, these people are still out there, and the message is
still the same. And it is loud and clear: No government-controlled
health care. Kill this bill.
Ms. BORDALLO. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to my friend and
colleague, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Israel).
Mr. ISRAEL. I thank my very good friend.
I want every veteran in America who is watching this debate who has
at one time or another tried to figure out why it takes so long to get
an overdue medal, why they have to wait so long to get a retroactive
payment for a disability or PTSD, I want them to remember that tonight,
when we try to pass a resolution on Iwo Jima, the Republicans delayed
it. When we tried to pass a resolution honoring aviators, the
Republicans delayed it. When we are going to try to pass a resolution
honoring Cold War veterans, the Republicans delayed it.
How can you expect as veterans to have your medical care taken care
of promptly when the other side won't even allow us to pass resolutions
honoring veterans expeditiously?
Mr. LAMBORN. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to my friend and
colleague from Texas, Representative Brady .
Mr. BRADY of Texas. I thank and commend the gentlelady from Guam for
her resolution. We have so many heroes, aviators who have been shot
down in foreign countries, defending our freedom and enduring
tremendous hardship, even death.
One of those who was shot down over Vietnam, the longest-serving POW
in America, Congressman Sam Johnson of Plano, Texas, is a friend and a
true hero to many of us. He opposes this health care bill because he is
worried about the impact it will have on veterans. He believes by
taking on a huge new entitlement we can never hope to pay for, at the
end of the day we will end up robbing Peter to pay Paul, and we will
rob from veterans' health care, which we don't even fully fund today as
a Nation. It's embarrassing. And yet we are going to launch a brand new
health care bill we can never afford to pay for. He is worried about
rationing.
He has seen what happens when Congress has the greatest intentions.
They passed this wonderful new GI Bill and updated one, yet never even
bothered to put in place a mechanism today. Most of the veterans
waiting in our offices are just trying to get the fair benefits this
Congress promised them, but
[[Page H1783]]
this administration, this government can't deliver. He is worried about
the fact that we can't fund health care under this bill.
And I think what frustrates people is we already have a Medicare
program that is going bankrupt. We have Social Security not far behind.
We don't fully fund veterans for military care, yet we are going to add
this new entitlement. Americans, I don't think, are very easily fooled.
They know the Democrats in Washington aren't really blameless when it
comes to who is responsible for driving health care through the roof.
Fueled by labor and lawyer contributions, millions and millions of
dollars from them in their pockets, Democrats have for decades
successfully killed lawsuit reform and efforts to allow small
businesses to join together to buy health care at the same discount the
big companies get. As champions of government mandates have driven up
health care premiums and union contracts have demanded unsustainable
health benefits, Democrats have fought voraciously against reasonable
efforts to keep health care costs down. Yet today Democrats in
Washington wield this sword of a massive government takeover in order
to slay the health care beast that they have been feeding for decades
and decades.
So tomorrow, even if the powerful combination of threats, union
paybacks, and backroom deals ultimately produce 216 votes, the fight
isn't over, and nor are the consequences. The images of Democrats in
Washington running from town halls, hiding from C-SPAN cameras,
slipping in sweetheart deals and arrogantly ignoring the voices of
constituents is also indelibly etched in the public's mind. It is a
disturbing picture the American people won't easily forget.
I object to that bill. I will fight it with all my might. It is not
the right solution for America.
{time} 1815
Ms. BORDALLO. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LAMBORN. Madam Speaker, I would inquire as to the time remaining.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from Guam has 3 minutes
remaining. The gentleman from Colorado has 1\1/2\ minutes.
Mr. LAMBORN. Madam Speaker, let me point out that there is a big flaw
in the process that we have been following here recently. We have these
massive groups of bills that we are supposed to absorb in a 72-hour
period which finishes tomorrow, and then we culminate potentially with
a vote on a massive piece of legislation reforming one-sixth of our
Nation's economy.
And if you look at this bill right here, this is the reconciliation
bill, H.R. 4872, the bill reported from the House Budget Committee,
2,310 pages; the two plain-language reports from the Budget Committee
totaling about 1,300 pages; and, the amendment in the nature of a
substitute of 150 pages. You add all that together, that is 3,800 pages
that we have been given in the last 3 days. I dare say there is not a
single Member of this House that has read these 3,800 pages, and that
is on top of the original bill of a couple thousand pages.
So we have a process here where we are not really given enough time
to absorb and go through these bills, and the American people really
deserve better than that. This system has not been followed like we
should be doing, and I just regret that. I think that is a flaw in this
process.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. BORDALLO. Madam Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and
I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentlewoman from Guam (Ms. Bordallo) that the House suspend the rules
and agree to the resolution, H. Res. 925, 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.
Ms. BORDALLO. Madam 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.
____________________