[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 103 (Wednesday, July 11, 2012)]
[House]
[Pages H4817-H4823]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                              {time}  1720
                       GOP FRESHMEN SPECIAL ORDER

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 5, 2011, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Reed) is recognized 
for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader.
  Mr. REED. Mr. Speaker, I rise this evening and come to the floor to 
talk about an important issue of the day. A few hours ago in this 
Chamber on this floor, this House voted to repeal ObamaCare.
  The Affordable Care Act to me is a classic example of what is wrong 
with Washington, D.C. It is a philosophy that this city has the 
arrogance and the vision to think that if we take over an area such as 
health care from Washington, D.C., somehow magically the bureaucrats 
and the folks here in Washington are going to wave a magic wand and 
cure the problems in the health care industry.
  What ObamaCare is, it's simple: it's an expansion of government, it's 
130 agencies, newly created agencies, to enter into the health care 
arena, 22 taxes to pay for that expansion of government to take on 
health care. You got half a trillion dollars of cuts to Medicare.
  Mr. Speaker, I have heard for the last 18 months, as a freshman 
Member of this Chamber, how the folks on this side of the aisle came 
here to Washington to kill Medicare. We literally had campaign ads 
where we were supposedly rolling Grandma and Grandpa up the Niagara 
Gorge to somehow represent that that's the mission of our side of the 
aisle. That's ridiculous.
  Here we have a bill that cuts Medicare $500 billion, and my 
colleagues on the other side of the aisle have the audacity to say that 
we're the ones who are trying to kill Medicare. Well, $500 billion 
worth of cuts to Medicare goes a long way to jeopardizing that program.
  I just come here tonight, Mr. Speaker, and I am joined by some of my 
fellow freshmen who will be coming in and out over the next hour, to 
really try to articulate to the people of America that with what the 
Supreme Court did--and I've read the decision at least five times, and 
I disagree with it--but I do agree with the one sentiment the Chief 
Justice represented in the majority opinion.
  He said, we're going to call, essentially, ObamaCare what it is, an 
expansion of government, and it's a tax; it's a tax increase. If that's 
what the people of America want their elected officials in Washington 
to do, then so be it. That is not for the Court, and that is not for 
the Chief Justice to decide. It's up to the people.
  The vote that we took this afternoon is done on the backdrop of the 
Supreme Court decision saying exactly what ObamaCare is, an expansion 
of government, tax increases to pay for it, and cuts to Medicare of 
$500 billion. Let's be honest with the American people. The American 
people deserve their elected officials to come to this floor, to this 
Chamber, and deal with the issues in an open and honest way.
  I was proud to cast the vote today to stand for repeal of ObamaCare 
because we can do better. We can do better than continuing the 
traditional Washington, D.C., tactics of, well, let the government take 
it over, let me raise your taxes to pay for it. You know what, we can 
do better than trying to say, well, it's a penalty and therefore we 
will argue until we're blue in the face that it's not a tax, but then 
the Supreme Court comes and says it is a tax. Let's just be honest with 
the issues that are before us tonight.
  I am joined by a great freshman colleague from the State of 
Mississippi. For his introductory remarks, I would yield as much time 
as he may consume in regards to this pivotal issue.
  Mr. PALAZZO. Thank you, Congressman Reed. I appreciate you organizing 
this Special Order tonight. It's a very important issue, not just to my 
constituents back in the State of Mississippi, the Fourth Congressional 
District, but to all Americans. So thank you for doing that.
  Over the past 2 years, our Nation has engaged in the debate of the 
future of our country and the future of health care reform. When the 
Supreme Court ruled to uphold the health care law as a tax, they never 
meant to send a message that this is a good policy. Their ruling did 
not change the fact that it is bad for our job creators, which are our 
small businesses. It's bad for families, and it's bad for seniors.
  They weren't putting their stamp of approval on the enormous burden 
of regulations and tax hikes that this bill brings. They weren't making 
a statement in favor of a law that takes health choices out of the 
hands of individuals and doctors and that places more control in the 
hands of government bureaucrats.
  What they did when they ruled on this law was reaffirm that this is, 
indeed, a multibillion dollar tax. The Court reaffirmed that it is, 
indeed, unconstitutional to force a massive Medicaid expansion upon 
States like Mississippi, which cannot afford it.
  Finally, the Supreme Court reaffirmed for myself and my colleagues 
and for millions upon millions of Americans that there is a need to 
fully repeal this law. So today, with this vote, we are listening to 
the majority of the American people who do not want this law, and we 
renew our commitment to them to bring real step-by-step commonsense 
solutions that Americans want and provide them with the access to the 
care they need from the doctor they choose and at a price that they can 
afford.
  Mr. REED. Well, I appreciate the gentleman from Mississippi's 
comments, and I hope he continues to stay with us here this evening and 
we have this conversation as we move forward.
  The gentleman from Mississippi touched on something, Mr. Speaker, 
that is extremely important when it comes to this issue. With the 
adoption and the repeal of ObamaCare, what we're trying to send to the 
American people is a message that the folks on this side of the aisle, 
in particular, want to make sure that we tackle health care reform and, 
one, we take care of the critical issue, and that is how are we going 
to change the cost escalators that are occurring in health care every 
year. How are we going to do that?
  Now, the fundamental principle over here on our side of the aisle 
that I firmly believe in is that we are going to do that, once we 
repeal this law, by taking reforms from the perspective of the 
individual, from the patient, and from the doctor's point of view, not 
from the ObamaCare model of handing it to administrators and 
bureaucrats and somehow thinking that the government has the solution 
to this problem.
  What we're going to deploy, in my opinion, are good old-fashioned 
market forces, forces of individual choice, having individuals and 
patients and doctors control their health care destiny rather than 
having some unelected bureaucrat under the Independent Payment Advisory 
Board making determinations as to what type of health care you're going 
to receive. We can do better than that in America.
  The gentleman from Mississippi makes a great point when he talks 
about the expansion and the tax burden that this law puts on all 
Americans. In particular, many folks, I heard the debate over the last 
couple of days, said we have used up floor time when we should be 
focusing on jobs.
  Well, you know what, this is related to jobs. Because of the 
expansion of government, the mandates that come from this and the 
higher taxes that are placed on all Americans as a result of this will 
saddle our private sector, will saddle our individuals, they will 
saddle our job creators with a burden that they just can't overcome. 
What we should be doing is relieving those burdens so that they can 
hire the people of today and tomorrow.
  This expansion of government just doesn't stop today. If it is 
allowed to go forward--and I hope my colleagues in the Senate take this 
bill up so the American people know exactly where they stand--but if 
this bill is allowed to go forward, we are saddling Americans with a 
burden, both tax and government regulations and mandates, to a point 
where we are just asking them to do something where they have just got 
a load that is too heavy to bear, and that's just simply to hire 
people. But you can't hire people if you have more taxes and you have 
got more burdens and obligations of government regulations to comply 
with.

[[Page H4818]]

  I see my friend from Mississippi may have a couple more comments on 
the topic.
  Mr. PALAZZO. Well, Congressman, there are so many bad things about 
this bill. We could spend a lot more than an hour talking about it.
  The American people have had over 2 years to fully digest the bill 
that was crammed down their American throats by the 112th Congress. 
What the Republican House is doing is we are not going to make the same 
mistakes that they did.
  We had a President, we had a Speaker of the House, and we had a 
Senate that ignored the pleas and cries of the American people. 
Nonetheless, they passed a 2,700-page bill. There is nothing good in a 
2,700-page bill. They did it under the cover of darkness.
  The former Speaker of the House said, ``You have to pass it before 
you'll know what's in it.'' We're not going to make those same 
mistakes. We're not going to repeat their failures. What we're going to 
do is we're going to listen to the American people. We're going to take 
their solutions so that we can address the care that they need from the 
doctor that they choose and at a price that they can afford.

                              {time}  1730

  There's some good things that are going to be coming forth. So I 
don't understand. Our colleagues on the other side are saying, Hey, 
this bill isn't perfect, but let's keep it and tweak it. There's no 
small fix to this bill. It is garbage. We have to throw it out and 
start over. But we're going to listen to the American people. And I 
think that's where they went wrong. We are even going to offer, I 
believe, our colleagues, as we've done in almost every bill, allow them 
to bring amendments to the floor, where in 2009 they did not allow one 
Republican amendment to the bill.
  So the old saying: If you're ignorant of the past, you're doomed to 
repeat it. Well, we've learned from our history, and we're going to 
make right for the American people on health care.
  Thank you, Congressman.
  Mr. REED. I appreciate the gentleman from Mississippi, a great Member 
of the freshman class, joining us tonight. I know we have some other 
colleagues to continue this conversation.
  One point before I yield to the gentleman from Florida. We're talking 
about job creation. Back in the district, back in upstate New York, in 
Corning, my hometown, we get out and we have town halls and we meet 
with constituents, we meet with business owners. And I'll tell you, one 
meeting really resonated with me. I went up to Hornell, New York, a 
great community up in our district, Mr. Speaker, and met with a company 
called Dyco Electronics. He employs about 48 employees. And he had me 
in his office, and we're walking down the floor watching his shop where 
he's assembling different electronic components and we're talking about 
the issues of the day. Mr. Speaker, he had a point that resonates when 
it comes to this issue.
  He said, You know what, Tom? I'm not going to hire any more people. 
I've got business. I've got some opportunities that I can potentially 
expand. But the CEO of Dyco electronics, 48 employees, said, If I go 
over 50 employees, I've got to then comply with ObamaCare. These 
mandates, these regulations. You've got 2,700 pages of statutory text, 
you've got tens of thousands of pages of regulations that ultimately 
will be created. And he just says, I can't take that chance.
  So this is all related to jobs also, as we continue this debate. It's 
not just about health care but it's about job creation. And I agree 
that it is a primary issue of the day. But that is a classic example 
and that resonated with me when I came back down here to stand for 
repeal, because so many small businesses, I think, are in the exact 
same situation as Dyco Electronics back in Hornell, New York, where 
they are shocked in a deer-in-the-headlight type moment where they're 
saying, No, we're not hiring because we don't want to go over that 50-
employee threshold.
  With that, I'm pleased to yield to a great member of the freshman 
class, the gentleman from Florida.
  Mr. WEST. Thank you very much to my colleague, Mr. Reed, for allowing 
me to be here and spend some time to talk about one of the reasons why 
I did not want to continue on supporting what has to be the ``Patient 
Protection Unaffordable Tax Act.''
  When you think about down in south Florida, where I am from, a lot of 
people play golf. I've never swung a golf club in my life. But I do 
appreciate this term that they use called a mulligan. And a mulligan 
means you get to do it over. And I think that's what the American 
people want from us here in this distinguished body, Republicans and 
Democrats, a do-over. So that's what we tried to do today. And 
hopefully, Senator Reid will take our heed and he will go forth and 
allow the American people to see that mulligan take place.
  But I sit on the Small Business Committee. When you think about the 
effects that this tax law--because that's really all that it is now 
that the solicitor general from the administration argued that it was a 
tax and Chief Justice Roberts did agree with him. So it's a tax. And so 
down South, if it quacks like a duck, if it walks like a duck, doggone 
it, it's a duck.
  Roughly 940,000 small businesses will be hit by an incredibly big tax 
hike. According to the National Federation of Independent Business, the 
advocacy group for small businesses, 75 percent of small businesses are 
organized as pass-through entities, small businesses, subchapter S, 
LLCs, meaning that they pay their taxes on their business income at an 
individual rate. The Joint Committee on Taxation estimates that this 
tax hike that is going to be hitting will affect 940,000 small 
businesses. Half of all small business income would face higher taxes.
  According to Bloomberg News and an analysis by the JCT, it also shows 
that President Obama's plan for these massive tax hikes mean higher 
taxes on 53 percent of business income reported on individual returns. 
More than a quarter of American workers' jobs are at risk. According to 
U.S. Census data through the NFIB, small businesses employ more than 25 
percent of the total workforce. So raising taxes on these small 
businesses threatens these jobs--and that's the last thing we need to 
do in this weak economy.
  My colleague, Mr. Reed, just talked about this artificial employer 
mandate where if you go over 50 employees, then you get hit with these 
fines because you have to provide certain levels of health insurance 
and health coverage. Well, why would we put that type of artificial 
burden? What does that mean for a small business owner that is at 48 
and 49? He's not going to seek to go any higher. Or, if he does go any 
higher, he's going to drop people off of his insurance coverage. Or, 
maybe even worse, he'll just get rid of that employee, which means 
another person that's added in.
  A U.S. Chamber of Commerce survey showed that 74 percent of small 
businesses contend that this law will make job creation at their 
companies even more difficult. The Supreme Court's health care ruling 
leaves in place 21 tax increases enacted as part of this law. A dozen 
of these are going to affect those people: less than $200,000 for 
singles and $250,000 for married couples--a clear violation of what the 
President talked about with his pledge to avoid taxes on lower- and 
middle-income taxpayers. This is the reason why I said we've got to 
have a mulligan.
  An additional 0.9 percent payroll tax on wages and self-employment 
income and a new 3.8 percent tax on dividends, something very important 
for seniors down in south Florida. Capital gains. Why are we going 
after capital gains in a health care law? I don't know. I think it's a 
tax law. Why are we going to go after capital gains when we need to 
have investments so we can grow our economy--and other investment 
income for taxpayers.
  ``Cadillac tax'' on high-cost plans; annual tax on health insurance 
providers; annual tax on drug manufacturers and importers; a 2.3 
percent excise tax on medical device manufacturers and importers. And 
if I'm right, Mr. Reed, that's one of those pieces of legislation, that 
31 or 32 sitting on Harry Reid's desk, so we can get rid of that 
medical device tax. Again, I just tell this guy we need to have a 
mulligan.
  Raise a 7.5 percent AGI on medical expense deductions to 10; deny 
eligibility of ``black liquor'' for cellulosic biofuel producer credit. 
What does that have to do with health care?
  Codify economic substance doctrine; increase penalty for non-
qualified

[[Page H4819]]

health savings account distributions; impose limitations on the use of 
health savings accounts, flexible spending accounts, and Archer MSAs to 
purchase over-the-counter medicines; impose fee on insured and self-
insured health plans and patient-centered outcomes research trust fund; 
eliminate the deduction for expenses allocable to Medicare part D 
subsidy; impose a 10 percent tax on tanning services.
  I have got to tell you, down in south Florida, if it's kind of 
clouded over, a lot of people go into the indoor tanning booths. Now 
they've got to pay a tax for that.
  What are we doing with the Tax Code, Mr. Reed? Are we now using the 
Tax Code as a means by which we're going to promote social policy? Are 
we using the Tax Code now as a means by which we're going to create 
behavior modification here in the United States of America? That's all 
this bill does.
  Sixteen thousand new IRS agents. Why do we need 16,000 new IRS agents 
if this is supposed to be a health care law? It's because someone's got 
to collect all that money that this ``Patient Protection Unaffordable 
Tax Act'' is bringing upon the American people.
  What do you really get with this? You get 159 new government agencies 
and bureaucracies. You get all of these different bureaucrats up here 
in Washington, D.C., that are going to interject themselves between the 
doctor-patient relationship.
  Well, no one talked about this a lot, how in this health care law the 
Federal Government took over college education loans. It was the people 
from across the aisle who made the decision that we will take it from 
3.4 to 6.8 percent. Once again, it became incumbent upon us to come in 
and try to clean up the mess that was made.
  It is truly as the former Speaker said: we have to pass this bill in 
order to find out what is in it. And now that we're finding out what is 
in it, we just cannot stomach this. The ObamaCare tax is already 
holding back job growth in medical innovation, with venture capital 
investment and medical device firms down 50 percent in 2011 compared to 
any of the previous 5 years. The average American family already paid a 
premium increase of approximately $1,200 in the year following passage 
of this law. The Congressional Budget Office predicts that health 
insurance premiums for individuals buying private health coverage on 
their own will increase by $2,100 in 2016 compared to what the premiums 
would have been in 2016 if this law had not been passed.

                              {time}  1740

  Mr. Speaker, there is no doubt about the fact that we need to do 
something to reform the health care process here in the United States 
of America and make it more affordable. But to all of a sudden bring 
the Federal Government in--you know, it was about 30-some-odd years ago 
when there was a former Democrat President that said everyone has a 
right to own a home, and the Federal Government created this thing 
called the Community Reinvestment Act. And look how well that worked 
out 30 years later in 2008 when we had that financial meltdown tied to 
the mortgage industry.
  So what is going to happen with this incredibly onerous invasion into 
the health care industry? I don't want to be around 30 years from now 
to see. And that's why my message to Harry Reid is very simple: The 
American people want a mulligan. Let's do it over and do it right.
  Mr. REED. Well, I so appreciate Mr. West's comments. The gentleman 
from Florida speaks very clearly and directly on the issues with this 
bill. And as the gentleman articulated, 139 different agencies are now 
created under ObamaCare.
  I've come to the well of the House, Mr. Speaker, to display to 
America what our health care system now looks like under ObamaCare. 
This diagram goes through the 2,700 pages of statutory language and 
identifies those 130-plus agencies. This is what American health care 
looks like after ObamaCare.
  We can do better. As the gentleman from Florida mentions, we need a 
mulligan. And what we need to do is listen to the American people. That 
is one of the fundamental problems down here in Washington, D.C. People 
down here think: I'm in Washington. I got elected and I got a title. 
I'm Paul Congressman. Of course I know what's best for everybody in 
America.
  Do you know what? I trust the American individual. I believe in the 
American individual. We need to listen to him. That's why we go back to 
the district and we talk to so many constituents. We have town halls 
because of the commonsense ideas that people have around their kitchen 
tables and the conversations they are having around their sofas in 
their living room.
  We should be listening to the American individual and the American 
people because the common sense of America is what makes us strong, not 
some bureaucratic thought process of some person reading a book who 
sits in a cubicle down here in Washington, D.C., and comes up with a 
monster of a health care program that's got 130-plus agencies.
  And this is how the personal relationship of a patient and a doctor 
is handled under ObamaCare. We can do better. We need a mulligan.
  I so appreciate my other friends in the freshman class coming this 
evening to meet with us.
  With that, I would like to yield to a good Member, a great friend 
from Arkansas (Mr. Griffin).
  Mr. GRIFFIN of Arkansas. Thank you. I appreciate it very much.
  Mr. Speaker, we have heard a lot about repeal and replace, and I have 
a lot of constituents asking about the replace part of that. And what I 
tell them is we have a lot of ideas that have been introduced here in 
the House. In fact, by last count, there are over 200. I think it's 
something like 219 bills introduced in the House that relate to health 
care reform. So we are not short of ideas in terms of implementing real 
health care reform.
  But before we get to that, we first must repeal this monstrosity, 
this almost 3,000-page monstrosity of taxes, new boards, and new 
agencies that makes it more difficult for businesses to hire new 
people. So that's why we're here focusing on repeal today.

  We have, Mr. Speaker, lots of ideas. For example, many of us here 
support medical liability reform. Gallup polls and other experts have 
testified that much of the cost of what we pay in health care is 
attributable to the practice of defensive medicine. By some counts, 
one-quarter of all health care costs are attributable to the practice 
of defensive medicine.
  We have a great medical liability reform bill. In fact, if I remember 
correctly, a couple years ago in the State of the Union, the President 
said he was in favor of medical liability reform. I haven't heard much 
from him on that. I wish he would talk more about it. It certainly 
wasn't part of his health care law. But that's a great idea that will 
reduce the practice of defensive medicine and reduce the cost of health 
care and, in turn, make health insurance more affordable, which, in 
turn, addresses the access question.
  We also have great legislation introduced by my friend, Marsha 
Blackburn of Tennessee. She has got a great bill. What it does is it 
allows for competition between insurance companies across State lines. 
So if you live in Arkansas and you see a health care plan that you want 
to buy over in Tennessee, our neighboring State, well, you can buy that 
plan. And then if you move to Arizona--I don't know why you would leave 
Arkansas, but if you did, you could take that with you across State 
lines.
  Competition, choice, and patient-centered options, that's the kind of 
health care reform we need. And that's the kind of health care reform 
that I favor, that many folks here in the House favor, and that is 
reflected in the over 200 bills that have been introduced here. And we 
want to get to that. But before we can get to that, before we can focus 
on the replace, we have to repeal. And that's why we're here again 
asking the Senate to do its part.
  I'll tell you, I've had some folks on Twitter and Facebook and other 
places say, You're just wasting your time. Why are you just wasting 
your time? I think I was asked that on television earlier today. And my 
response was, when I made a pledge in my campaign to repeal ObamaCare, 
the President's health care law, whatever you want to call it, my 
pledge was not I'm going to fight to repeal it if the Senate agrees to 
pass it. That wasn't my pledge. My pledge was I'm going to fight to 
repeal it. I'm going to control what I can control. I can't control the 
Senate.

[[Page H4820]]

  In fact, I told somebody on Twitter about 15 minutes ago, before I 
came down here to the floor, I said, well, if we in the House only took 
action on issues that we know the Senate will vote on, we would all be 
sleeping. Mr. Speaker, you'd be sleeping in the chair and we'd be 
sleeping, because the Senate doesn't take action on much of anything. 
Sometimes I feel like I've got to walk down there and wake them up.
  So my job in fulfilling my promises, my pledges, and my commitment to 
my constituents is not dependent upon whether the Senate is going to do 
the right thing or not. I hope they do. I'm praying for them, and I 
wish them well. But we're going to do our job here regardless of what 
they do down there.
  I'll say one more thing. Anybody who has been paying attention over 
the last 2 years knew before I ever got elected what my intention was. 
And I think a lot of us talked about this before we ever got here, and 
what we are doing is following through on our promise.
  I yield back, and I appreciate the time.
  Mr. REED. I appreciate the gentleman's comments.
  I think you're touching on something when we talk about the Senate 
and what we can control here in the House. And I think today's exercise 
of voting to repeal ObamaCare again was time well spent, because it's 
time to be open and honest with the American people.
  Look at this bill, the 2,700 pages that created this health care 
system with 139 agencies that you see on this board. Look at the timing 
of when these requirements and these mandates kick in. Look at the 
whole argument of the last 2 years in the debate on the Affordable Care 
Act, ObamaCare. Look at the argument over whether it's a penalty or a 
tax.
  I can remember Kathleen Sebelius in front of me on the Ways and Means 
Committee still fighting me as the arguments were going on in front of 
the Supreme Court whether or not this was a tax or a penalty. 
Essentially, she fought that tooth and nail and said, no, it's not a 
tax; it's a penalty.

                              {time}  1750

  You saw the President repeatedly tell different reporters and go on 
the record and say it's not a tax; it's a penalty. There's a lot of 
politics going on under this bill. And they all want to do it in a way 
that makes sure that they're not held accountable, in my opinion, 
because November 6, 2012, is a critical date. When you look at most of 
the dates under this bill, when most of the mandates and most of the 
tax increases are kicked in, they happen after November 6, 2012.
  What's so magical about November 6, 2012? Well, obviously we have a 
Presidential election. We have a Senate election. We have a House 
election. So today, what we did, after the Supreme Court spoke and 
called the bill what it is--an expansion of government, a tax 
increase--we went on the record so that the American people, come 
November, know where we stand.
  Now, I'm not as hopeful as my colleague was talking about the Senate 
may take this up, or asking Harry Reid to take this up. What I think is 
going to happen is the Senate is going to run from this. They're not 
going to go on record in regards to how they feel on the repeal of 
ObamaCare, if they're either going to reinforce it or reaffirm it. 
They're not going to take it up. Why? Because November 6, 2012, is 
coming down the pipeline, and they don't want to go on record after the 
Supreme Court has spoken and called it what it is--expansion of 
government and a tax increase.
  That's not how elected officials lead. Elected officials lead by 
putting their name up on the board and standing in front of their 
constituents and in front of the American people and being honest and 
open with them because hardworking taxpayers deserve no less. And as a 
freshman Member of this Chamber and as a freshman Member of this body, 
I firmly believe we can tackle more of our problems if we adopt that 
attitude, just being open and honest with the American people.
  With that, I'm so pleased to be joined by the gentleman from Colorado 
(Mr. Gardner).
  Mr. GARDNER. I thank the gentleman from New York for his time today 
and his leadership on this important issue. I know you have a young 
family, as do I, and you're here today to make sure that we talk about 
those matters that are important to our families, those things that 
will lead to a better future for them.
  But it's been a disappointing day today when we saw colleagues on the 
other side of the aisle who had an opportunity to reject one of the 
largest tax increases in American history, when they could have voted 
to repeal and begin the replacement process on the health care bill, 
the President's takeover of health care, but, instead, most of them, 
the vast majority of them, decided to move forward with the tax, a tax 
that they pledged they would never commit and carry out on the middle 
class of this country.
  Growing up in a little town of the eastern plains of Colorado, I will 
never forget my hometown doctor. At times, he was the only doctor in a 
town of about 3,000 people. His name was Jack Pierce. Dr. Pierce was 
somebody that's still looked up to in my hometown. He's moved away, 
lives in Texas now, but he's somebody who parts of the new hospital is 
named after, somebody who delivered me and was there when my mom, in my 
hometown, was delivered as well.
  Dr. Pierce was my doctor's name. With the health care bill, the rest 
of America gets Dr. Washington. Dr. Washington is now going to make 
health care decisions for the American people. If you're sick and you 
need help, you better have the approval of Dr. Washington first because 
Dr. Washington has a board of bureaucrats that will decide for you what 
kind of treatment you may or may not receive.
  Dr. Washington is going to ensure that you have a $1,200 increase in 
health care premiums if you're the average American family. That's just 
what happened after the first year of enactment of the President's 
health care takeover.
  Dr. Washington will see that, in 2016, you'll have a 13 percent 
increase in your premium for individuals and families who can buy 
coverage on their own compared to if the law hadn't been enacted at 
all, a 13 percent increase if the law hadn't been enacted at all.
  Going back to Colorado and talking to business owners, they talk 
about what their costs will be. Families talk about the insurance that 
they'd like to have now, the insurance they wanted to keep but are 
concerned they're not going to be able to under the President's 
takeover of health care. This tax increase will cost Americans dearly. 
It will cost them the doctors that they wanted and it will cost them 
the insurance that they'd like to keep.
  We know that this bill is going to cost even more than it was 
anticipated to cost. As recently as June 27, 2012, they said that this 
health care bill would cost $1.8 trillion over the next 10 years. 
Today, we see numbers with new estimates over $2 trillion, nearly $2.6 
trillion over the next 10 years to pay for this. How is it going to be 
paid for? A tax on the American people.
  In a letter to the Governor of Texas, Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary 
Sebelius, wrote, saying:

       We encourage you to participate in this new, expanded 
     health care opportunity because of the generous Federal 
     benefits that are being offered.

  How is this country going to pay for those generous Federal benefits? 
Deficit spending? borrowing? tax increases? The answer is: All of the 
above. In fact, that may be the only thing this administration agrees 
with when it comes to all of the above--taxes, spending, and debt.
  Ladies and gentlemen, the people that I represent in Colorado, the 
people that we represent in this country are asking for real health 
care solutions. They're asking for solutions that will improve the 
quality of care while decreasing the cost of care. The President's 
takeover does none of those.
  We have an obligation to this country, to the people we represent, to 
make sure they understand that when the chief actuary of Medicare says 
that the two primary promises that were made in this health care bill 
will never materialize, that it will decrease costs and that if you 
like the insurance you have, you get to keep it--the chief actuary, 
independent actuary, has said those two primary promises will not be 
realized. And yet today, the vast majority of people in the President's 
own party said move forward with the tax and say good-bye to the health 
care

[[Page H4821]]

that you and your family is hoping to secure.
  So with that, I would again thank the gentleman from New York for the 
opportunity to be here to talk about ways that we can move this country 
forward and our obligation to the American people.
  Mr. REED. I so appreciate the gentleman from Colorado joining us 
tonight.
  When you talk about Dr. Washington, it is a great analogy. What we're 
really talking about--are we not?--is the Independent Payment Advisory 
Board as kind of the primary example of the agency of Dr. Washington.
  What is the Independent Payment Advisory Board? It's 15 unelected 
bureaucrats that, under the law, will be making recommendations to 
Congress as to where to cut in Medicare, the types of services that are 
going to be provided under American health care going forward under 
ObamaCare.
  Now, the argument I've heard from my colleagues on the other side of 
the aisle is, well, those are just recommendations. But they go to 
Congress, and if we disagree, we can take a vote in the House and take 
a vote in the Senate and the President signs it into law, and we 
overrule those recommendations.
  Look at the law. Read the law. I trust the American individuals. Read 
the law. What do those recommendations do?
  Those recommendations come to Congress and require a two-thirds vote 
of the House and the Senate to approve or disapprove those 
recommendations if we want to do something differently than what the 
agency recommends to us. Why stack the deck? Why have a two-thirds 
voting requirement on such a critical issue as to what health care is 
going to be delivered in America? So let's just be open and honest with 
the American people and call it what it is.
  You've got 15 unelected bureaucrats--under the law, not obligated to 
conduct their conversations or their debates in public--make 
recommendations to Congress so that they can say that we're having 
Congress ultimately have the ultimate decision, but then make Congress 
have a two-thirds voting requirement to override those 15 members of 
that unelected Independent Payment Advisory Board when it comes to 
health care decisions. What kind of health care system is that?
  We can do better. We don't need to rely on Dr. Washington. We need a 
mulligan, as my colleague from Florida said. We can do better. We can 
do it by repealing this and listening to the American people and 
adopting reforms that are patient-centered and doctor-centered at the 
end of the day.
  With that, I am so pleased to be joined by a great colleague from 
Tennessee (Mrs. Black), a colleague of the Ways and Means Committee. 
I'm proud to yield to her.
  Mrs. BLACK. Thank you, my colleague from New York. I want to thank 
you for managing this Special Order tonight because we cannot talk 
about this issue enough. We have got to continue to make sure that the 
American people are aware of this devastating bill called ObamaCare, or 
the Patient Affordability Act.
  Now, having been a nurse for over 40 years and working in the health 
care system, we have the best health care in the world. I have done 
medical mission trips in other parts of the world, and I can tell you 
they don't come anywhere near providing the kind of quality service 
that we have here in this country. As a matter of fact, we will see 
people from other countries come to the United States to get that care 
because they know across this world that we provide the best health 
care in the world.
  But I'm not going to disagree that the system is broken and does need 
some repair.

                              {time}  1800

  We do need to have more accessibility. We do need to lower the cost, 
and we need to make sure that, while doing that, we maintain and 
increase quality.
  However, what has happened in the bill that was passed some 3 years 
ago now by our colleagues on the other side of the aisle, there wasn't 
transparency, there wasn't input by those who were providing care and 
that are a part of the system, and we didn't see patient-centered care.
  There are other solutions. This is not the only solution. And as my 
colleague from New York shows this chart, this very complicated chart, 
when Nancy Pelosi said that we have to pass this bill to know what's in 
it, she was correct, because as we look at these 139 different agencies 
that still are going to have to be created and rules and regulations 
that need to be promulgated, we have no clue of what's going to be 
happening with this health care system now for the next 5 to 8 years.
  We do have some solutions, good solutions that are patient-centered, 
that are market-driven solutions, such as HSAs, which really have not 
been given a chance. But HSAs are a very, very good way, especially for 
the young. Many of the young people that are currently not insured are 
not insured because they can't see a reason for paying for the very 
expensive insurance that's out there and available for them.
  Things such as removing the barriers from purchasing your health care 
across State lines, these are some good, market-driven ideas that will 
bring the cost of health care down and give patients more opportunity 
for them to make decisions about what's best for them in their health 
care.
  Also, tort reform. We know tort reform has worked in those States 
where it has been successfully implemented. Tort reform needs to be 
done across the entire country.
  These are real solutions that allow the patient to be in the driver 
seat to make those decisions about what's best for them.
  But, instead, what do we have?
  We have a law that's devastating our economy, and it is wrong 
medicine for our health care system.
  Three-quarters of our small businesses--and I know that as I visit 
these small businesses across my district, they're the bedrock of the 
U.S. economy--say the law is preventing them from hiring people. And 
all of this, and health care costs continue to soar, so it hasn't done 
anything to bring the cost down. What we're seeing is the cost 
escalating.
  And to make matters worse, ObamaCare will result in millions of 
Americans being dropped from their employers' health insurance plans 
and pushed on the government-run health insurance. And all of this, all 
of this results in more deficit spending and more tax hikes for the 
middle class folks.
  The President has said as recently as this week that he does not want 
to raise taxes on the middle class. He also says he wants Congress to 
focus on job creation and the economy.
  But, Mr. President, the House has voted yet again to do just that. By 
repealing ObamaCare, we can prevent this crippling tax on the middle 
class, and this will also lift the cloud of uncertainty and other job-
killing taxes that are wreaking havoc on our economy and our health 
care system.
  It's been 41 straight months of unemployment above 8 percent, and it 
doesn't look like things are going to change very soon. If the 
President is committed to helping the middle class like he says, then 
he will join us in doing away with this law that is increasing the 
tax burden and the cost of health care for all Americans. Americans 
deserve better.

  Thank you again, my colleague from New York, for managing this time 
to allow us to be able to talk to the American people and help them 
understand there are real solutions out there.
  Mr. REED. I so appreciate my colleague from Tennessee offering her 
comments. And I know we're coming to the end of our hour with a few 
minutes left, but we have plenty of time for two more colleagues that 
have joined us this evening.
  I yield to a great gentleman from Texas, a member of the freshman 
class, Mr. Flores.
  Mr. FLORES. Mr. Reed, I want to thank you for managing this Special 
Order today, and thank you for allowing me some time to participate.
  I'm very proud of our freshman class here in Washington. We have 
changed things in this town, at least on this side of the Capitol, and 
we're responding to what the American people want. The American people 
overwhelmingly do not want ObamaCare.
  So I have to thank Mr. Palazzo and Mr. West and Mrs. Black. I assume 
Mr. Woodall's going to speak in a few minutes, and Mr. Gardner, and 
thank them for getting up here and telling the truth.

[[Page H4822]]

  A few minutes ago I was sitting in the Chair as the Speaker pro 
tempore, and the gentleman from California (Mr. Garamendi), a Democrat, 
and Mr. Tonko, a Democrat from New York, invited me to come down and 
debate with them, so I'm here to debate with them.
  If you'd listen to what the Democrats say about ObamaCare, you'd 
think the world was going to be perfect and butterflies were going to 
be singing Kumbaya. You'd think that everything was going to be just 
fine.
  When you go to the HHS Web site that talks about ObamaCare, all you 
see are all the things that tell you about how great your life is going 
to be, but it doesn't discuss the cost. And only in this town we call 
Washington, D.C., this town that's based on fantasy, can you believe 
things like that, where you can get everything for a cost of nothing.
  Well, Americans know that's not the case. They know that you can't do 
that, and Americans know that you can't take one-sixth of our economy 
and turn it over to bureaucrats like the people that run the GSA. Now, 
the people at the GSA partied real well, but I don't trust them with 
our Nation's health care, not my granddaughter's, not my grandmother's, 
none of their health care.
  Now, we, as I said, in this town we're changing things as the 
freshman class. Most of us that came in this class came from the real 
world. We know how to sign the front side of a paycheck, we know what 
the commitment is like to have to hire an employee, to have to make 
sure that that employee's family gets a paycheck so that that family 
will have food and housing and education; that they can be part of a 
robust local economy so that they can be part of a healthy middle class 
in this country.
  But bureaucrats don't do that. The private sector does that, builds 
that healthy economy for Americans.
  So, again, I just can't see how you could say that we could turn over 
health care to folks like the ones that run the GSA.
  What Mr. Garamendi and Mr. Tonko need to do, when they say that 
everything's for free and costs nothing, and the world's going to be 
better off, they need to come talk to a small software company in Waco, 
Texas, that saw their premiums go up in 2011 by 27 percent and saw 
their health insurance premiums go up this year by 23 percent. Or the 
small manufacturer in Bryan-College Station, Texas, that's looked at 
their premiums increase by a combination of about 40 percent over the 
last 2 years. And each of these companies is thinking, Do I have to 
drop coverage? Do I have to lay off employees so I can absorb the extra 
cost? Do I move my operations overseas?
  The folks on the other side of the aisle need to understand that the 
taxes, the restrictions, the regulations that come with ObamaCare are a 
tax on all America. When you tax the economy, you tax all Americans. 
And we've already talked in great detail. Mr. West laid out all the 
taxes in ObamaCare, did it pretty well.
  But I just say, when you add it all up, and you add all those taxes 
together, they're a tax on the economy, and that's a tax on the middle 
class. That's a tax on every class in America. And that's not what 
Americans want.
  I voted for the repeal of ObamaCare today, and I'm proud I did. And 
I'd urge that Harry Reid, over in the Senate, take it up.
  And so I've put together sort of the top 10 fatal flaws that are part 
of ObamaCare, and here they are.
  Number one, the worst of them is it's a violation of our 
constitutional liberties, your right to your religious preferences, 
where you can have a bureaucrat, like the ones at the GSA, cram down 
your throat what your employer has to provide for you or what it may 
not provide for you.
  Number two, it fails in its primary goals of controlling costs and 
allowing Americans to keep their health insurance coverage. You heard 
our other freshman speakers lay that out well today.
  Number three, it hurts our hardworking taxpayers by adding over 20 
new taxes, costing over $800 billion, taxes on things like home sales 
and investment income. Those hit the middle class just like everybody 
else.
  Number four, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget 
Office, the CBO, as we call it around here, it will cost our Nation 
over 800,000 jobs. How's that good for the middle class?
  In addition, now that the State Medicaid mandate was ruled 
unconstitutional, the costs of ObamaCare are going to increase by $700 
billion. And that's already on top, further damaging our fragile fiscal 
situation at the Federal level.
  Number six, we've already talked about this tonight, a half a 
trillion dollars cut from Medicare, hurting our seniors.

                              {time}  1810

  Number seven, ObamaCare puts 15 unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats 
between doctors and patients.
  Mr. Speaker, I don't want people who run the GSA between me and my 
doctor or between my granddaughter and her doctor or my daughter-in-law 
and her doctor. This is an assault on all Americans--women and men, 
young and old.
  Number eight, even though it has been partially implemented, it has 
caused health care premiums to inflate dramatically across the country.
  Number nine, ObamaCare is causing massive uncertainty for American 
businesses, hurting American job growth and our economy and the 
American middle class, adding further pain to all of the economic 
policies that we are experiencing in the Obama economy.
  Number 10, we heard about this earlier, about the Federal takeover of 
the student loan program, which is another accounting gimmick that was 
used to pay for the Democratic takeover of health care.
  So, Mr. Reed and Mr. Speaker, I would say it's time for us--and we 
did today--to recognize that these fatal flaws mean that this program 
should be overturned. We did the right thing today. We took bold 
action, and I think it's high time that the Senate acted and did the 
same thing.
  One of the things that Mr. Tonko and Mr. Garamendi talked about is if 
Americans wanted to hear the facts. They laid out their version of the 
facts. Americans can go my Web site. There is an ObamaCare section at 
flores.house.gov that's right at the top of the page. You can find out 
about the taxes. You can find out about the law and about the times 
we've tried to repeal this thing. You can read the law to see what's in 
it. You can read the Supreme Court decision. Then you can also see what 
the Republican alternatives are, some of the ideas of the alternatives 
to fix this.
  Mr. Reed, I thank you for your leadership on this, and I look forward 
to serving with you.
  Mr. REED. I appreciate the gentleman for joining us this evening.
  I know we have another freshman colleague from the great State of 
Georgia who has joined us this evening and who will bring us to a 
conclusion.
  Mr. Woodall, I am proud to yield to you.
  Mr. WOODALL. I thank the gentleman for yielding. I appreciate the 
Speaker for being down here with us, and I appreciate the comments of 
my friend from Texas.
  He says, you know, if you want to, you can just go and read the law. 
Wouldn't that be neat? Wouldn't that be neat? If you wonder what some 
of those reforms are that the freshman class brought to this body, you 
can now go and read the law. There is time to make that happen, and 
that is what is so frustrating to me about this debate.
  I appreciate the way that you all have highlighted each and every one 
of these things, because when I go to the folks back home, they say, 
Rob, the President told me he's going to bring down health care costs. 
Wouldn't that be good?
  I say, Yes, that would be good.
  They say, The President tells me he's going to ensure that I can keep 
the policy that my family knows and loves today. Wouldn't that be good?
  I say, Yes, that would be good.
  Then the people say, Well, Rob, he tells me he's going to make sure 
that children who don't have access to health care today will have 
access to health care tomorrow. Wouldn't that be good?
  I say, Yes, that would be good.
  They say, So why do you oppose the bill?
  I say, Because it doesn't do any of those things. Take a look.
  Now, the CBO tells us it's 800,000 jobs that this bill destroys. 
Let's say it's

[[Page H4823]]

only 700,000. That's 700,000 too many. Study after study tells us this 
is raising costs with all the mandates--mandate after mandate after 
mandate--from the Federal level. Let's say there are only a dozen 
mandates instead of the 30 or 40 that I believe there are. Isn't that a 
dozen too many?
  In my great State of Georgia, a family went out to buy insurance for 
their child shortly after the President's health care bill passed. Do 
you know what the insurance commissioner told them? He said, You know, 
you could have purchased a policy for your child before the President's 
health care bill passed--but, after the President's health care bill 
passed, every single insurer of children left the State of Georgia 
because they could not do business under the President's model.
  Read the law, my colleague from Texas says. Look at the chart, my 
colleague from New York says. When you get to the facts, if only it did 
what the President promised America it would do, but it doesn't. But we 
can.
  The first vote we took as freshmen was to repeal the President's 
health care bill. About 189 of our colleagues voted against it. They 
wanted to keep it. Today, only 185 of our colleagues voted against it 
and wanted to keep it.
  The folks asked back home, Rob, what happens now that the Supreme 
Court has said it's okay?
  I said, They didn't say it was okay. They said they weren't able to 
look at the policy to see if the policy was any good. They said it's 
not their job to protect the American people from their political 
decisions. They said, yes, the power to tax is just this dangerous but 
that it's up to Congress to decide.
  Congress decided today.
  I am grateful to my friend from New York for using this opportunity 
to highlight that decision. The final say on this bill was not the last 
Thursday in June with the Supreme Court. It is the first Tuesday in 
November with the American people.
  You and I know what the American people are going to say. We are 
their Representatives. This is not the 29th time, and it is not the 
30th time. It is the 31st time the American people's Representatives 
have spoken in this House, and they've said we can do better. This bill 
is bad for America. It's bad for health care reform. We can do better.
  I thank my friend from New York.
  Mr. REED. I appreciate the gentleman from Georgia and my colleague 
from Texas and all of my colleagues for joining us.
  As we wrap up tonight, you're absolutely right. We can do better. 
Health care, obviously, needs to be reformed. The costs that we are 
seeing and the increases in costs in health care need to be addressed, 
but this law doesn't do it. This law compounds the problem. Just look 
at its track record. I've been contacted by numerous constituents over 
the last year who were talking about premium notices with increases of 
10 to 15 percent in the State of New York. It's not delivering on the 
promises.
  As my colleague from Texas says, read the law. Absolutely, read the 
law. We have. We have spoken in this body on behalf of the people and 
have said we stand for repeal. My colleague from Georgia is absolutely 
correct, and the Chief Justice's closing comments are absolutely 
correct--it's up to the people. That's when they will speak, in 
November 2012.
  I know that we stand on their side with the vote that we took today 
to say that we can do better. We need to stop this government takeover 
and these tax increases that are coming down the pike to pay for it. We 
need to stop it before it's too late, and November 2012 is the last 
stop to allow us to turn this back.
  With that, I am so pleased to yield back the balance of my time.

                          ____________________