[Congressional Record Volume 159, Number 120 (Thursday, September 12, 2013)]
[House]
[Pages H5517-H5529]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
NO SUBSIDIES WITHOUT VERIFICATION ACT
Mrs. ELLMERS. Madam Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 339, I call
up the bill (H.R. 2775) to condition the provision of premium and cost-
sharing subsidies under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act
upon a certification that a program to verify household income and
other qualifications for such subsidies is operational, and for other
purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 339, the
amendment printed in House Report 113-206 is adopted, and the bill, as
amended, is considered read.
The text of the bill, as amended, is as follows:
H.R. 2775
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``No Subsidies Without
Verification Act''.
SEC. 2. CONDITIONING PROVISION OF ACA PREMIUM AND COST-
SHARING SUBSIDIES UPON CERTIFICATION THAT A
PROGRAM TO VERIFY HOUSEHOLD INCOME AND OTHER
QUALIFICATIONS FOR THOSE SUBSIDIES IS
OPERATIONAL.
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no premium tax
credits shall be allowed under section 36B of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 and no reductions in cost-sharing shall
be allowed under section 1402 of the Patient Protection and
Affordable Care Act (42 U.S.C. 18071) before the date that
the Inspector General of the Department of Health and Human
Services certifies to the Congress that there is in place a
program that successfully and consistently verifies,
consistent with section 1411 of such Act (42 U.S.C. 18081),
the household income and coverage requirements of individuals
applying for such credits and cost-sharing reductions prior
to making the benefits available.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The bill shall be debatable for 1 hour with
40 minutes equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking
minority member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and 20 minutes
equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member
by the Committee on Ways and Means.
The gentlewoman from North Carolina (Mrs. Ellmers) and the gentleman
from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone) each will control 20 minutes. The
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Brady) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr.
Levin) each will control 10 minutes.
General Leave
Mrs. ELLMERS. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to
include extraneous materials on H.R. 2275.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentlewoman from North Carolina?
There was no objection.
Mrs. ELLMERS. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
I rise today to speak about the economic disaster facing all
Americans on October 1.
Nearly 3 years ago, I decided to run for office for one primary
reason: to defeat and repeal Obamacare. Three years later, this
terrible law is set to be implemented and the dire warnings and
predictions are already coming true.
This past summer alone, we saw three major delays in the law's
implementation--from the employee mandate to consumer price caps to the
issue we are debating here today.
Congresswoman Black's bill, H.R. 2775, the No Subsidies Without
Verification Act, is a first step at attacking the latter.
The premise of this bill is quite simple. Serving as the stewards of
taxpayer dollars is one of our most important jobs as Members of
Congress. After all, dollars wasted by Congress or improperly spent by
the executive branch has a direct impact on the budgets of families
across this country who are struggling to pay their bills.
This is why I was appalled by this summer's announcement by the
Department of Health and Human Services. In the 600-page rule issued
during the July 4 holiday, HHS stated that they would no longer verify
income for ObamaCare subsidies. Instead, the Obama administration would
now rely on self-attestation and sample audits when launching the
ObamaCare exchange subsidy program--an initiative that is estimated to
cost over $1 trillion over the next decade.
After receiving criticism, HHS announced that they would reverse
course and extend audits to all applicants. Yet, to this date, the
administration has issued no formal change in the rule to codify this
policy. In other words, they are saying one thing and doing another.
As it stands today, the rule issued by HHS reads:
The exchange may accept the applicant's attestation without
further verification.
And yet, while verification has been removed, the fines remain in
place. Any applicant who enters information improperly could possibly
face a $25,000 fine. If the mistake is knowing and willful, the fine
could grow as high as $250,000.
As Ronald Reagan famously said, ``trust, but verify.'' If history is
any guide, these claims of accountability will be disregarded unless
oversight is enforced.
This only reinforces the need for the No Subsidies Without
Verification Act. The bill would simply require certification systems
to be in place so that the administrators can successfully and
consistently verify eligibility before any premiums and cost-sharing
credits are paid out.
Similar language was adopted by the Senate, but the bill before us
would implement a bipartisan consensus and protect taxpayer dollars. It
would do so by requiring the inspector general of HHS to certify that
income verification is in place before precious taxpayer dollars are
wasted and abused.
I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of H.R. 2775, and I reserve the
balance of my time.
Mr. PALLONE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
The bill before us today is nothing more than another page out of the
Republican playbook to delay, derail, and otherwise repeal the
Affordable Care Act. Rather than a productive, bipartisan effort to
ensure successful implementation, Republicans will instead waste more
precious floor time to take their 41st vote that undermines and repeals
the Affordable Care Act.
H.R. 2775 is based on a flawed premise that HHS does not have the
verifications in place to ensure that families who are getting
financial help are eligible for that help.
But my Republican friends, that's simply not true, and your bill will
do nothing but prevent millions of hardworking American families from
gaining Affordable Care Act coverage.
First and foremost, this bill is totally unnecessary. HHS already has
[[Page H5518]]
stated in regulations that they will check and verify income on 100
percent of the applications. If someone receives payments that they
determine aren't substantiated, those payments will have to be paid
back--100 percent verified and reconciled.
Here is how it works. To get subsidies to make their health insurance
affordable, hardworking Americans and families will submit their
projected annual household income through the marketplaces. The data
will then be checked against IRS data, Social Security data, and
current wage information. If there is an inconsistency, the
marketplaces will require additional documentation from applicants.
In addition, marketplaces will check employer coverage information
from the applicant and their employer against data from a number of
employer data sources approved by HHS to verify eligibility for the
subsidies. If applicant information and other data do not match, the
marketplaces will ask for further supporting documentation.
And lastly, all payments of premium tax credits are reconciled by IRS
the following year. The income data submitted to the marketplaces are
reconciled against the actual wages and health-covered information on
the individual's income tax return. If there is an inconsistency, the
applicant pays back the excess.
Let me repeat that part, that last part, Madam Speaker, because it is
the most critical. Even after HHS has verified wage information on each
individual situation that arises before tax credits are sent out, the
income information will still be doublechecked again against actual
wages on the individual's income tax return the following year. So if
there is an inconsistency, the applicant pays back the excess. There
is, again, 100 percent income verification and reconciliation on the
back end.
Madam Speaker, both CBO and JCT, the Joint Committee on Taxation,
confirmed this, stating that the program HHS has in place satisfies the
certification requirements under section 1411 of the law--proving,
again, that this bill is simply irrelevant.
But, of course, in light of this report, our Republicans at the
twelfth hour have hastily amended the bill. The new language will
basically ask the IG of HHS to formally certify these verification
systems, which does nothing but delay the start of the law and deny
millions of hardworking Americans from getting the tax credits they're
clearly eligible for.
I maintained in Rules last night, and I'll maintain again, this is
not the responsibility of the inspector general. The inspector general
doesn't do this. They probably can't do this.
The IG's office has confirmed these implications by stating that this
new language places unworkable requirements on their office and that it
has no resources to perform this and that it is outside of its
traditional role. The Republicans know very well all of this, and
that's the exact reason they made this change. It's simply a delay
tactic.
{time} 0930
Again, the IG won't be able to do this. This is not its traditional
role. So the only thing that happens here, Madam Speaker, is that this
is a legislation which, of course, will never pass; but if it did pass
and got signed by the President, which would never happen, it would
simply delay the implementation of the Affordable Care Act, and that's
what the Republicans want. Repeal, delay, defund--this is what they're
all about. It's the 41st vote, again, to repeal the Affordable Care
Act.
Madam Speaker, we are 20 days away from October 1, when millions of
uninsured Americans will finally get access to quality, affordable
health care. No longer will hardworking families worry about getting
sick or injured or losing coverage because of the loss of a job,
because the Affordable Care Act gives health security and peace of
mind. For those hardworking families who need additional tools to help
them afford their health coverage, the ACA will help make coverage a
reality.
So despite the delay tactics in this bill and the millions of hours
and dollars spent to derail the ACA, the law is moving forward.
Organizations across this country, including labor, small businesses,
employers, health care providers, advocates, religious leaders, and
others, will continue to focus on helping uninsured Americans gain
access to health care.
I urge my colleagues to oppose this bill. It is, again, an
unnecessary delay; but I at least am optimistic in knowing that the ACA
will move forward and that the Republicans will not have success.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mrs. ELLMERS. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Pennsylvania (Mr. Pitts), the chairman of the Energy and Commerce
Health Subcommittee.
Mr. PITTS. I rise in support of H.R. 2775, and I commend the
gentlelady, Congresswoman Black, and also Congresswoman Ellmers for
their leadership on this issue.
Madam Speaker, earlier this year, we found out that the IRS flagged
for further review 90 percent of Americans who claimed the adoption tax
credit, and 70 percent of the adoptive families faced at least a
partial audit. Only a minuscule percentage of the tax credits given to
those families were disallowed. Many needy families saw their returns
delayed for months. We also found out this year that hundreds of
conservative nonprofits had their applications for tax-exempt status
delayed for months and years by IRS agents.
Ask millions of small business owners who have spent hours laboring
over tax returns--the government doesn't typically operate by the honor
system, but when it comes to doling out billions of dollars in new
ObamaCare subsidies, the government is just going to accept
applications without question, on the honor system.
This is all in the interest of getting ObamaCare up and running as
soon as possible without any regard to potential fraud, and it's after
the old ``pay and chase'' model. We are entrusted with protecting
taxpayer dollars, not watching them go out to people who don't need
them. If the Treasury Department can't figure out how to prevent fraud,
then subsidies shouldn't be going out the door. And if the tax subsidy
is overpaid to the insurance companies for the tax credits for
individuals, guess who pays back the overpayment? It's not the
insurance companies. It comes out of the individual's pocket.
I'm sure I won't be the only person on the floor today to recall
President Reagan's words of ``trust, but verify.'' The byword for
ObamaCare is just simply ``trust.'' The Obama administration doesn't
trust adoptive parents or conservative nonprofits or small businesses;
but for the purpose of getting the President's signature legislation up
and running, they are perfectly willing to see taxpayers get fleeced.
This is simply wrong. We need to demand that the administration follow
the law. ObamaCare was such a landmark piece of legislation. Why does
it have to be ignored at every turn?
I urge Members to support the bill.
Mr. PALLONE. Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from
North Carolina (Mr. Butterfield), a member of our committee.
Mr. BUTTERFIELD. Thank you very much, Mr. Pallone, for yielding time
this morning, and thank you for your extraordinary leadership on our
committee and for giving affordable health care to every American.
Madam Speaker, I rise this morning to oppose H.R. 2775. This bill, if
passed by the House and passed by the Senate and signed by the
President, which I would say is highly unlikely, would require the
Secretary of Health and Human Services to certify to Congress that an
income verification system is in place before any subsidies can be
distributed for individuals to purchase health insurance through the
marketplace.
Here you go again--repeal effort No. 41.
The Republican majority is obsessed with discrediting the President
of the United States by using every procedural maneuver imaginable to
weaken this law, which was passed by the Congress and upheld by the
United States Supreme Court.
I invite my Republican colleagues to read a report published by the
Congressional Budget Office, which states that HHS already has in place
sufficient safeguards for distributing subsidies to assist uninsured
Americans with the purchase of insurance.
[[Page H5519]]
This is not an honor system, Mr. Pitts. It is written into the law,
and the Congressional Budget Office recognizes that we do have in place
a system to verify the incomes.
Madam Speaker, I am still fuming about the 15 Republicans on the
Energy and Commerce Committee who on August 29 sent a multi-page
investigatory letter to 51 community nonprofits that have been approved
to receive navigator grants to assist the uninsured with the process. I
simply do not understand how the chairman of a committee and a few
like-minded committee members can author a letter to grant recipients,
demanding that they answer questions and produce documents. I suggest
that this letter exceeds the authority of these individuals to harass
and to intimidate grant recipients.
I urge the Republican majority to stop trying to discredit President
Obama. Stop trying to defund and repeal the Affordable Care Act. It is
the law of the land. Millions of Americans are benefiting from it today
and will be in the future. You should be using this creativity and
energy expended this morning to pass a budget and lift the sequester,
which is hurting families and communities all across America.
My friends, get serious; and let's stop playing games with the
American people.
Mrs. ELLMERS. I now yield 2 minutes to the gentlelady from Tennessee
(Mrs. Blackburn), the vice chair of the Energy and Commerce Committee.
Mrs. BLACKBURN. I thank the gentlelady.
Madam Speaker, I want to commend Mrs. Black, my colleague from
Tennessee. She has done a tremendous job in bringing this legislation
forward, and she brings it forward because of the experience we have
had in Tennessee with a program that was called TennCare, which had no
verification. It became ``just in time'' insurance, and guess what? It
became too expensive to afford. When you do not exercise appropriate
oversight and verification, that is what happens--you incentivize the
use. Those who really do not qualify come into the program. Indeed, we
had a Governor--a Democrat Governor by the way--who removed about
300,000 individuals from this program.
I am pleased that as we discuss and stand in support of H.R. 2775
that my colleagues across the aisle are getting our message. When it
comes to ObamaCare, yes, delay, defund, repeal, replace. That is
exactly what we want to do because this law has become so amazingly
unpopular with the American people and, indeed, with women. Over 65
percent of all American women oppose this law and the implementation of
this law.
The reason we are bringing this legislation forward is that there is
a gaping hole. We know that having self-attestation for getting these
taxpayer subsidies in these exchanges is going to lead to an incredible
amount of fraud. We are even having estimates of as much as $250
billion worth of fraud, which could be going into this program. We're
not acting on theory. We're looking at what has previously happened
with programs such as TennCare. Indeed, my colleague from New Jersey
has heard me talk about this for years, and he knows that when we look
at something that is public option health care that that is the public
option from which we draw our experience.
Mr. PALLONE. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from
California (Mrs. Capps), who is a long-time supporter and person in the
mix on health care, certainly as a nurse and as a health care
professional.
Mrs. CAPPS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, my friend from New Jersey.
Madam Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this bill. Our Nation
is facing a host of challenges: we need to end the sequester; we need
to fund our government properly to avoid a shutdown; we need to
increase the deficit limit so that we can pay our bills and maintain a
strong credit rating; and we must have a full and open debate about
what to do in response to chemical weapons being used in Syria.
But instead of any of these pressing issues, here we are again, at
the insistence of the House majority, voting for the 41st time to
repeal, defund, obstruct, or derail the Affordable Care Act; and they
want to do so as more and more Americans, including my constituents on
the central coast of California, are now beginning to benefit from the
law.
Already 11,000 young adults in my district have gained health care
insurance coverage under their parents' plans, allowing them to pursue
their education or to start new ventures without the fear of going
bankrupt if they should get sick. Almost 300,000 of my constituents are
now able to get the preventative health services they need without
worrying about the cost, and 10,000 seniors have already found relief
when falling into the dreaded prescription drug doughnut hole in
Medicare; and in less than 1 month, California families who for so long
have been priced out or denied coverage in the private health insurance
market will finally get the coverage they want and deserve.
Throughout the program--we call it Covered California Exchange--along
with health care at marketplaces all across this country, individuals,
families and small businesses will gain a transparent, one-stop shop to
compare health insurance policies. They will also be able to receive
financial assistance and to sign up for high-quality, affordable, and
secure insurance coverage; and they won't have to worry about being
denied coverage for their preexisting conditions. Yet this bill before
us would erode all of these benefits, essentially blocking hardworking
families from getting the affordable health insurance coverage they
need.
The American people have moved on. They want us to come together to
improve our Nation, not to divide it. So I urge my colleagues to vote
``no'' on this bill. Let's get to work on the many critical issues
facing our Nation.
Mrs. ELLMERS. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlelady from
Washington, Congresswoman McMorris Rodgers, the chair of our Republican
Conference.
Mrs. McMORRIS RODGERS. I thank the gentlelady.
Madam Speaker, in less than a month, enrollment for ObamaCare's
largest entitlement program will begin. Subsidies will go out the door
on January 1, and they will go to anyone who claims he is eligible--no
verification, no accountability. The GAO and the Inspectors General for
both Health and Human Services and the IRS have told us that the
administration's verification system is extremely vulnerable to fraud,
but the picture gets worse.
In 2012 alone, Health and Human Services gave out more than $64
billion in improper payments. In fact, the Department of Health and
Human Services, the agency charged with implementing these exchanges,
has the highest annual improper payment rate among Federal agencies.
The Department of the Treasury, which is responsible for enforcing 47
different tax provisions, is second only to Health and Human Services.
The Wall Street Journal recently reported that not verifying
eligibility could cost taxpayers more than $250 billion in improper
payments. Yet the administration doesn't seem to care.
Over the last several months, we've seen the wheels falling off--the
delay in the employer mandate, the delay in the consumer cost
containment rule, the delay in the finalizing of agreements with
insurance plans, and now this delay in ensuring that the verification
mechanisms are in place to protect taxpayers. This administration has
made one thing clear, that it will stop at nothing to ensure that 7
million people are enrolled in exchanges in 2014--2.7 million of whom
must be young in order to make it work--and that subsidies are handed
out to as many Americans as possible.
{time} 0945
The administration's decision to allow enrollees to self-attest to
the information provided to the exchanges is not only irresponsible,
but ripe for fraud. The only real solution is the passage of H.R. 2775,
and I urge our colleagues to support this bill.
Mr. PALLONE. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Speaker, this is sort of a charade that's going
on today. Our Republican friends allow, for example, businesses to
self-certify in a whole range of other areas. This is not about that.
What this is, is another attempt to sabotage health care reform.
[[Page H5520]]
America is involved in a grand reform. Some of us are in States like
Oregon, California, Washington, New York, and Maryland where we're
actually working to implement the reform, and our citizens are going to
have lower rates, more choices, and subsidies for individuals and small
businesses for better coverage.
In other parts of the country some of our Republican friends have
decided to sabotage implementation. Customers won't get extra help in
Alabama, Oklahoma, Texas, or Wyoming, where insurance commissioners
won't even review health plans to make sure that they're offered in the
new marketplaces to provide consumers with required benefits and
protections. In Missouri, believe it or not, the Republican legislature
has made it illegal for new health insurance marketplaces for State
employees to tell people what they're eligible for. Today, this is one
more effort to throw sand in the gears.
The response from Republicans, who have no vision for health care,
refuses to acknowledge that what we are working on now and what they
derisively call ObamaCare, actually had its roots in a bipartisan
consensus of what's necessary to get more value out of American health
care.
The health care reform train has left the station. We should simply
reject today this misguided attempt to sabotage it. Americans from
coast to coast will be able to see the difference in communities that
are embracing it and implementing it versus those that are trying to
sabotage it.
In the course of the next 2 years, the facts will be clear.
Mercifully, what the House is going to pass today is not going to be
enacted into law, and the rest of us can get to work implementing
reform.
Mrs. ELLMERS. Madam Speaker, I yield myself 45 seconds just to
outline some of the things that have already been repealed in
ObamaCare.
As a consequence of Congress passing ObamaCare to find out what is in
it, we have found some terrible ideas in the law. To date, the
President has actually signed into law seven bipartisan bills repealing
or defunding parts of the health care law. H.R. 4 repealed the small
business paperwork mandate, or the 1099. H.R. 1473 cut $2.2 billion
from a stealth public plan and froze the IRS budget. H.R. 674 saved
taxpayers $13 billion by adjusting eligibility for ObamaCare programs.
H.R. 2055 made more cuts to CO-OPs, IPAB, and the IRS. H.R. 3630
slashed billions from ObamaCare slush funds. I could go on, Madam
Chairwoman.
Now I would like to yield 2 minutes to my colleague from
Pennsylvania, Congressman Pat Meehan.
Mr. MEEHAN. Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of the No
Subsidies Without Verification Act, legislation of which I'm a proud
cosponsor. October 1 is only days away, and almost every day we see a
brand new headline about ObamaCare, demonstrating the ``train wreck,''
as one Senator put it. Those are their words, not mine.
The thousands of rules, regulations, and mandates are only increasing
the cost of health insurance and dramatically expanding the bureaucracy
in our health care. And the implementation of ObamaCare has been one
disaster after another.
Buried in the hundreds of pages of regulations that have been
released this summer was a rule change announcing that the government
will no longer verify whether applicants for ObamaCare's insurance
exchange are actually qualified for the aid. Instead, they will simply
rely on the honor system.
Madam Speaker, we're talking about billions of dollars here. How can
we possibly be relying on an honor system? According to The Wall Street
Journal, it's estimated that not verifying the eligibility could result
in approximately $250 billion in fraudulent payments.
The No Subsidies Without Verification Act will stop any taxpayer
funding subsidies until an accurate real-time verification system is in
place to ensure the applicants are indeed eligible. It seems like
common sense to me. We need a trusted system in place to stop any
waste, fraud, and abuse resulting from not verifying eligibility for
ObamaCare insurance subsidies.
This is being operated through a data hub, which will have millions
of persons' personally identifying information. Of most concern, this
is going to be a honeypot for identity theft and the very purpose for
which it was put in place in the first place. This income verification
is not capable of being accurately done because this administration has
refused to allow the businesses who will give the information to apply.
I am a proud cosponsor, and I urge passage of this bill.
Mr. PALLONE. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New
Jersey.
I rise today to ask an incredulous question of how many times do we
have to say, ``No,'' and how many times do the American people have to
say, ``Take your hands off my good Affordable Care Act'' that has
allowed millions of Americans to have preventible care that is being
poised to attack the scandalous high percentage of uninsured in the
State of Texas, being the number one State with uninsured persons? How
many times?
First of all, this bill is frivolous. The reason is because there is
a construct in the Affordable Care Act to deal with all of the
questions that they've asked. First of all, it will require that
individuals will have to submit their projected annual household
income. All income data submitted through the marketplace will then be
checked against IRS data, Social Security data, current wage
information. If there is inconsistency, the marketplace will require
additional documentation. In addition, marketplaces will check employer
coverage information from the applicant and their employer against
data, OPM, and the SHOP Marketplaces, as well as other data sources.
It is absolutely absurd for this bill to place more responsibilities
on an already sequestered government. If my colleagues want to do
anything to provide any substance to what they're talking about, let's
put a bill on the floor to end sequestration. There's no resources that
would add to the inspector general's ability to do all that they said.
Let me add further insult to injury, and I want my constituents to
listen closely. $67 million was given to navigators to provide the kind
of oversight and construction that these individuals on this bill have
suggested they need. What I find appalling and what I've not seen in my
tenure in Congress is the number of Members on the Energy and Commerce
Committee that have sent a letter to the 51 navigators governed by
Health and Human Services to require them to send information.
I want my navigator that received a grant from HHS to refuse to do
anything with that letter, and I'm going to ask the Secretary of HHS to
reject this letter that has no authority in law. Again, it is trying to
abuse and reject the idea of the Affordable Care Act.
This bill should go down, and don't answer the letter. This is a bad
way to deal with health care in America.
Madam Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 2775, the so-
called ``No Subsidies Without Verification Act.'' I oppose this
unnecessary and dilatory legislation which imposes unnecessary and
burdensome conditions on the ability of Americans to utilize the tax
credits provided by the Affordable Care Act which will enable them to
purchase affordable health insurance for themselves and their families.
This is the 41st attempt by House Republicans to repeal, delay, or
undermine effective implementation of the Affordable Care Act.
Even though the Affordable Care Act, which has been upheld by the
Supreme Court and is here to stay, House Republicans refuse to abandon
their quixotic quest to derail a law that will bring peace of mind to
millions of Americans and reduce the deficit by $1 trillion.
Their latest attempt is the bill before us which prohibits any health
insurance premium tax credits from being provided until the HHS
Inspector General Office certifies there is a program in place that
``successfully and consistently verifies'' household income and
coverage requirements for those applying for these credits.
This bill, H.R. 2775, is unnecessary because HHS already has a strong
income verification system in place, as confirmed by CBO. The only
purpose of this legislation is to hinder the implementation of the
Affordable Care Act.
The impact of the enactment of this GOP bill would be an
unconscionable delay in obtaining health insurance for more than 25.7
million Americans, 22.7 million of whom are members of working class
families.
The new requirement imposed by the irresponsible bill before us would
delay millions of
[[Page H5521]]
our hard-working constituents from getting the premium tax credits they
are clearly eligible for beginning on January 1, 2014.
Madam Speaker, Americans do not have to be told that justice delayed
is justice denied!
Under current law, to receive the premium tax credits to make their
health insurance affordable, individuals will have to submit their
projected annual household income. All income data submitted through
the Marketplaces will then be checked against IRS data, Social Security
data, and current wage information. If there is an inconsistency, the
Marketplaces will require additional documentation from applicants.
In addition, Marketplaces will check employer coverage information
from the applicant and their employer against data from OPM and the
SHOP Marketplaces as well as other data sources approved by HHS to
verify eligibility for the tax credits. If applicant information and
other data do not match, the Marketplaces will ask for further
supporting documentation.
Further, all payments of premium tax credits are reconciled by IRS
the following year. The income data submitted is reconciled against the
actual wages and health coverage information on the individual's income
tax return. If there is an inconsistency, the applicant pays back the
excess, subject to statutory limit and there is 100 percent income
verification and reconciliation on this back-end.
In sum, there are ample existing safeguards to ensure that premium
tax credits are available only to those eligible to receive them.
Madam Speaker, after the sobering events of the last week, regarding
war and peace, I would hope all my colleagues would take into
consideration the importance of using our limited legislative time more
wisely.
We should be addressing the need to eliminate sequestration, raising
the debt ceiling and passing the jobs bill in order to repair
infrastructure. But instead House Republicans continue to repeal,
delay, or undermine the Affordable Care Act. Instead of wasting time on
these time-consuming but futile efforts, our friends across the aisle
should join with their Democratic colleagues to work together to create
jobs and educational opportunities for our people.
Moreover, the Affordable Care Act is working and my constituents--and
those of my colleagues--are benefiting from this landmark legislation.
Many of those most in need of the healthcare coverage provided by the
Affordable Care Act live in the districts of many members on both sides
of this argument. My home state of Texas leads the list of states with
the highest percentages of uninsured residents. The states with the
highest percentage of uninsured are:
1. Texas: 28.8%.
2. Louisiana: 24%.
3. Nevada: 23.3%.
4. California: 23.2%.
5. Florida: 22.8%.
6. Georgia: 22.5%.
7. Arkansas: 21.9%.
8. Mississippi: 21.7%.
9. Oklahoma: 21.4%.
The highest concentration of the uninsured is the poor. The
Affordable Care Act provides at no or nearly no cost to states an
option to enroll those living in or near poverty into their Medicaid
program, which would benefit my state of Texas tremendously if the
Governor can be persuaded to follow the example of his Republican
counterparts and accept a deal of a lifetime.
I cannot understand the continued refusal by House Republicans to
accept the Affordable Care Act, which is now the law of the land and is
modeled after the plan put in place in Massachusetts by the nominee of
their party in the last presidential election.
Instead of focusing on the issues that the American people want
addressed, we are having the same discussion to repeal the Affordable
Care Act in efforts of my colleagues to repeal, obstruct and undermine
this law.
What is even more frustrating is that while there is so much energy
in trying to repeal the Affordable Care Act, there has been no plan or
suggestions posed on how to replace it.
Additionally, I oppose this misguided legislation because the
Affordable Care Act is working for America and for my constituents in
the 18th Congressional District of Texas. Let me count the ways:
13 million Americans benefited from $1.1 billion in rebates sent to
them from their health insurance companies last year.
105 million Americans have access to free preventive services,
including 71 million Americans in private plans and 34 million seniors
on Medicare.
Millions of women began receiving free coverage for comprehensive
women's preventive services in August 2012.
100 million Americans no longer have a life-time limit on healthcare
coverage.
Nearly 17 million children with pre-existing conditions can no longer
be denied coverage by insurers.
6.6 million young-adults up to age 26 have health insurance through
their parents' plan, half of whom would be uninsured without this
coverage.
6.3 million Seniors in the `donut hole' have already saved $6.1
billion on their prescription drugs.
3.2 million Seniors have access to free annual wellness visits under
Medicare, and
360,000 small employers have already taken advantage of the Small
Business Health Care Tax Credit to provide health insurance to 2
million workers.
Because of the Affordable Care Act 3.8 million people in Texas--
including 2.2 million seniors on Medicare now receive preventative care
services. Over 7 million Texans no longer have to fear lifetime limits
on their healthcare insurance. Texas parents of 300,731 young adults
can sleep easier at night knowing that their children can remain on
their health insurance until age 26.
The protection provided by this law is a guarantee to 5 million Texas
residents that their insurance companies will spend 8o percent of their
premium dollars on healthcare, or customers will get a rebate from
their insurance company.
In my state, there are 4,029 people who had no insurance because of
pre-existing conditions, but today the Affordable Care Act has provided
them with access to coverage. The Affordable Care Act means that many
Texans are free of worry about having access to healthcare insurance.
The Affordable Care Act has helped my constituents in the 18th
Congressional District of Texas tremendously. Because of the Affordable
Care Act:
11,400 young adults in the district now have health insurance through
their parents' plan;
Over 4,100 seniors in the district received prescription drug
discounts worth $5.4 million, an average discount of $600 per person in
2011, $650 in 2012, and $1,040 thus far in 2013;
71,000 seniors in the district are now eligible for Medicare
preventive services without paying any co-pays, coinsurance, or
deductible;
121,000 individuals in the district--including 23,000 children and
50,000 women--now have health insurance that covers preventive services
without any co-pays, coinsurance, or deductible;
113,000 individuals in the district are saving money due to ACA
provisions that prevent insurance companies from spending more than 20
percent of their premiums on profits and administrative overhead.
Because of these protections;
Over 31,100 consumers in the district received approximately $4.4
million in insurance company rebates in 2012 and 2011--an average
rebate of $95 per family in 2012 and $187 per family in 2011;
Up to 46,000 children in the district with preexisting health
conditions can no longer be denied coverage by health insurers;
153,000 individuals in the district now have insurance that cannot
place lifetime limits on their coverage and will not face annual limits
on coverage starting in 2014;
Up to 193,000 individuals in the district who lack health insurance
will have access to quality, affordable coverage without fear of
discrimination or higher rates because of a preexisting health
condition; and
The 17,000 individuals who currently purchase private health
insurance on the individual or small group market will have access to
more secure, higher quality coverage and many will be eligible for
financial assistance.
However, the list of benefits from the Affordable Care Act is not
complete. In 2014, when the Affordable Care Act's final provisions will
become effective, insurance companies will be banned from:
discriminating against anyone with a pre-existing condition; charging
higher rates based on gender or health status; enforcing lifetime
dollar limits; and enforcing annual dollar limits on health benefits.
In 2014, access to affordable healthcare for the self employed or
those who decide to purchase their own coverage will be easier because
of Affordable Insurance Exchanges. There will be a one-stop marketplace
where consumers can do what Federal employees have done for decades--
purchase insurance at reasonable rates from an insurer of their choice.
This will ensure that health care consumers get the care that they need
from the medical professionals they trust most at a price they can
afford.
This Congress has work that needs to be done, and it is work that
should be taken up to restore workers, their families, and communities
to sound economic health. We do not have time time for partisan
political games that do not advance the interests of the American
people.
With less than 20 days before enrollment in the Marketplaces begins,
the last thing we should be doing is considering legislation that
serves no purpose other than to delay affordable health care coverage
to millions of Americans who need and deserve the security and peace of
mind such coverage brings.
[[Page H5522]]
I urge my Colleagues to put partisan politics aside and join me in
voting no on the passage of this bill.
Thank you, Madam Speaker.
House of Representatives
Committee on Energy and Commerce,
Washington, DC, August 29, 2013.
Dear ------: Pursuant to Rules X and XI of the United
States House of Representatives, the Committee on Energy and
Commerce is examining the role Navigators will play in
efforts to enroll individuals in health insurance exchanges
under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA).
On August 15, 2013, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid
Services (CMS) awarded $67 million in Navigator Cooperative
Agreements to entities that will assist consumers in
preparing electronic and paper applications to establish
eligibility and enroll in coverage through the PPACA
marketplaces. Your organization was identified as a recipient
of a Navigator grant by the Center for Consumer Information
and Insurance Oversight (CCIIO).\1\
In order to better understand the work you will perform as
a Navigator and the consumer protections that will be in
place before open enrollment begins on October 1, 2013, we
ask that you contact Committee staff to schedule a briefing
to occur no later than September 13, 2013, to discuss your
participation as a Navigator in the health insurance
exchanges. We also ask that you provide written answers to
the following questions and produce the materials requested
no later than September 13, 2013:
1. Provide a written description of the work that will be
performed with the funds obtained via your Navigator grant.
This would include a description of the number of employees,
volunteers, or representatives that will be utilized and the
pay and duties for each, as well as a written description of
how any other portion of the grant may be spent. If a budget
or detailed description of how this funding will be utilized
exists or will be created, provide these documents in
addition to the written response requested.
2. Provide a written description of the training or
education employees, volunteers, or representatives must
complete, including training or education required by the
Department of Health and Human Services (HMS), CMS, CCIIO, or
any other federal or state entity. Provide a written
description of any training or educational efforts employees,
volunteers, or representatives must complete that are
required by your organization beyond that required by any
federal or state entity. Provide copies of these materials.
3. Provide a written description of the processes and
procedures in place to monitor, review, or otherwise
supervise your employees, volunteers, or representatives. If
documentation of these standards exists or will be created,
provide these documents in addition to the written response
requested.
4. Provide a written description of how your organization
will utilize the information obtained during performance of
your Navigator grant. This would include, but is not limited
to, descriptions of the measures your organization will take
to safeguard an individual's personal and medical
information. Furthermore, provide a written description of
whether your organization may use any of the information
obtained during performance of your Navigator grant,
including any prohibitions on the use of that information.
For example, please provide a written description of whether
your organization may contact individuals who have utilized
your services as a Navigator for the purposes of fundraising,
voter registration efforts, campaign activities, or any other
reason.
5. Provide a written description of whether your
organization has been contacted by any health insurance
company or health care provider to discuss your Navigator
grant. This would include, but is not limited to, discussions
of supporting your organization in any way or promoting the
health insurance company or health care provider to
individuals your organization may contact.
6. Provide all documentation and communications related to
your Navigator grant. This would include, but is not limited
to, materials your organization submitted in order to obtain
the grant, materials provided to your organization upon
obtaining the grant, and communications between your
organization and representatives from HHS, CMS, CCIIO or any
other federal or state entity. This request also includes,
but is not limited to, any documents provided by (or
communications with), representatives from HHS, CMS, CCIIO,
Enroll America, or any other entity including federal or
state governments discussing individuals to target or solicit
for enrollment under the PPACA, including discussions or
documents related to geographic area.
Instructions for responding to the Committee's document
request are included as an attachment to this letter. Thank
you for your prompt attention to this matter. If you have
questions or wish to discuss your responses or production,
please contact Karen Christian or Sean Hayes.
Sincerely,
Fred Upton, Chairman; Tim Murphy, Chairman, Marsha
Blackburn, Vice Chairman; Phil Gingrey; Gregg Harper;
Cory Gardner; Joe Barton, Chairman Emeritus; Joseph R.
Pitts, Chairman, Subcommittee on Health; Michael C.
Burgess, Vice Chairman, Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations; Steve Scalise; Pete Olson; Morgan
Griffith; Bill Johnson; Renee Ellmers; Billy Long.
Mrs. ELLMERS. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
I would just like to point out to my colleagues across the aisle that
in the latest Wall Street Journal article of September 10, one of the
things that they point out again is that in the Senate, which is the
Democrat majority, they put in an HHS spending bill a sense of the
Senate that the provision for income verification be in place.
This is something that is very important. It is common sense. Madam
Speaker, wouldn't it be just a major commonsense issue to just simply
put in place a proactive prevention of fraud, waste, and abuse?
I would also like to point out to my colleagues that have discussed
the issue of whether or not the inspector general has the ability to do
so, first and foremost, we wouldn't be approaching this in this manner
if the rule had not been removed. Yet, we have to have a system in
place that will address these issues.
There is no reason that we can't approach it from this, again, very
commonsense approach where we ask that we actually have a rule put in
place. We can't simply move forward on this incredible disaster of a
law when we are not asking for some verification. I think it's a very
simple move. I think it's a very commonsense move.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. PALLONE. Madam Speaker, I ask how much time remains on both
sides.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from New Jersey has 5 minutes
remaining, and the gentlewoman from North Carolina has 6 minutes
remaining.
Mr. PALLONE. I now yield 3 minutes to the chairman emeritus of the
Energy and Commerce Committee, Mr. Dingell.
(Mr. DINGELL asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. DINGELL. Madam Speaker, here we go again. Time in the House is
being wasted. The business of the Nation is being obfuscated. The
Republicans have got more nonsense to put on the floor.
We're told that this is important. That's baloney. This is the 41st
time that the Republicans have tried to gut the Affordable Care Act.
They don't understand that you're supposed to respect the will of the
people and to carry forward the business of the Nation. What a shame
that we have such behavior on that side of the aisle.
All Members agree that we have to verify the incomes of those getting
subsidies through the marketplaces, and that is exactly what will take
place starting on October 1. This is obfuscation and deceit. All income
data will be submitted through the marketplaces and will be checked
against data from both the IRS and the Social Security Administration
under existing practices. This is a lot of witchcraft and baloney. If
there is an inconsistency, then additional documentation is going to be
required. Furthermore, all the subsidies are reconciled by the IRS when
an individual files their tax returns.
This is just spinning by people who don't want the legislation to
come to be, and again, this is the 41st time we've engaged in this
silly exercise.
The practical impact of this bill is to deny millions of Americans
from getting subsidies for purchasing health insurance. Its purpose is
to delay and obfuscate the implementation of the legislation that it is
supposed to be helping. To pass this bill is simply going to prove to
be a malicious assault on the most vulnerable people in our country and
those most in need of the Affordable Care Act.
We've seen this song and dance before. As I mentioned, this is the
41st time we've engaged in this nonsense, wasting about $1.5 million
each hour we're doing this. I urge all of my colleagues to join me in
opposing H.R. 2775. This is political gimmickry. It is going to have
harmful effects, and it is intended to do so.
I urge that the legislation be rejected and that we stop this
nonsense and we get going forward to try to see to it that we do
implement, in a proper way, the Affordable Care Act.
I thank my good friend New Jersey for yielding this time to me, and I
urge my colleagues to reject this nonsense.
[[Page H5523]]
Mrs. ELLMERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 2 minutes to respond to
some of the comments from my esteemed colleague.
This is theory. That's basically what we have now, because, as the
rule was removed the week of the Fourth of July, there has been no rule
put in place to replace it. Basically what we're hearing is the
description of how it would be run if the rule were in place.
Mr. Speaker, an August 5 frequently asked question document was given
out by HHS and the administration, which basically explains the verify
process of the Federal exchange but outlines no details on how it will
occur. Additionally, this fact sheet has no force of law. Even worse,
the fact sheet doesn't even pretend to address the verification
applications submitted to ObamaCare exchanges administered by the
States. It simply says that the State can choose whatever sample size
it wants to audit, meaning no actual verification may occur before
millions of dollars of taxpayer-financed benefits are paid out.
{time} 1000
While I believe America is a Nation of honorable people, we have to
remember there are always those who will abuse the system. The fact
sheet from CMS doesn't change the status of the rule. States can
continue to audit whatever sample size they see fit or simply not audit
at all.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Texas (Mr.
Gene Green) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.
(Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and
extend his remarks.)
Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I oppose this unnecessary piece
of legislation.
Thank you for the time to speak. The bill before us is unnecessary.
It is burdensome and serves as a barrier for those who are qualified to
receive the core they need. Health and Human Services (HHS), the
Internal Revenue Service (IRS), and the marketplaces are equipped to
handle income verification. If people lie on their tax forms, that is a
federal crime.
This is nothing more than one more attempt to block implementation of
this law. The Republicans know that as implementation moves ahead their
exaggerations and their fear mongering will be exposed. This is a
desperate, last ditch effort to stop millions of qualified individuals
and families from being able to access care by holding back any
subsidies until unreasonable requirements are met by HHS. We have
controls in place. The marketplaces and the IRS are tasked with
reconciling the data they receive. Americans who are eligible for
subsidies should receive them and this bill prevents it from happening.
The Affordable Care Act is a critical law but it's not a perfect law.
However, we are spending time with 11th hour attempts at thwarting the
law of the land, upheld by the Supreme Court, rather than spending time
helping our constituents navigate the new health landscape.
I oppose this bill and urge my colleagues to oppose the bill.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New
Jersey (Mr. Andrews).
(Mr. ANDREWS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from New Jersey for
yielding, and I'm glad he's back with us.
The purpose of this bill is to make it as hard as possible for a
hardworking person to get health insurance for their family. So
somewhere in America today there's a person working in a nursing home
or a retail store or driving a schoolbus, and if their children got
sick tonight, they could not take them to a hospital with an insurance
card in their pocket; they'd have to pay for it whatever way they
could, which is not at all.
The new law says that that person, under most circumstances, starting
October 1, can sign up for a health insurance policy as good as the
ones that Members of Congress have, for a reasonable and affordable
price, maybe $30 or $40 a week for that family. This is not someone on
public assistance. This is not someone sitting around watching someone
else pay their bills. This is a hardworking, taxpaying American. That
person has to report their income. They have to follow the rules and do
all the things that are needed to be done. This bill makes it as hard
as possible for that person to do that, and that's why it should be
defeated.
So here we are again. This is attempt number--what number are we
using today--44, 45, 46, whatever the number is. The government is
going to shut down on September 30 if we don't pass a budget. The
majority said it was going to bring that budget to the floor this
morning, but they're not doing that. Instead, we're having attempt
number 44 to repeal the Affordable Care Act. This is not only a waste
of the country's time, it's an imposition on hardworking people who
finally deserve a break after all these years.
Vote ``no'' on this unwise piece of legislation.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone)
has 30 seconds remaining.
Mrs. ELLMERS. Mr. Speaker, we are prepared to close. I would like to
ask my colleague if he has any further speakers remaining?
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to yield the
remaining 30 seconds to our Ways and Means Committee time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from New Jersey?
There was no objection.
Mrs. ELLMERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Here in Washington we have a way of doing things, and one of those
ways is to deal with problems after they've been created.
Prior to coming to Washington, I was a nurse for many, many years.
One of the rules that we had drummed into our heads was, if it's not
documented, it did not happen. This is a rule that is not documented,
so it will not happen. It is not enough that we simply ask to be on the
honor system. This is a very important piece of legislation. We must
ensure the hard-earned taxpayer dollars are protected and abuses are
avoided. I would urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on H.R. 2775 for
this purpose. I believe it is incumbent on the American people and the
job that we do here in Washington to ensure that this happens.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Poe of Texas). The gentleman from Texas
(Mr. Brady) has 10 minutes. The gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin) has
10\1/2\ minutes.
Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
I rise in strong support of the No Subsidies Without Verification Act
because too many of our precious tax dollars are being lost to fraud.
That's the simple goal of this bill by Representative Diane Black,
stopping fraud and abuse in ObamaCare.
We wouldn't allow an individual to apply for a mortgage, a car loan
or a credit card without verifying their income. You can't go into a
restaurant, grocery store, or gasoline station and just pay on the
honor system. Yet today--because the White House, frankly, has botched
the last 3\1/2\ years, and ObamaCare is still not ready--somehow they
believe that it's okay for billions of dollars in new taxpayer
subsidies to go out the door without a bat of the eye on the honor
system.
As hard as you work to earn every paycheck, how much more fraud in
health care can we accept? Today we have the opportunity, and I think
the responsibility, to hold the Federal Government's feet to the fire
and insist it put in place strong protections that will end this pay
first and chase later model that's been so ineffective at stopping
fraud.
This bill simply insists that the independent inspector general of
the Health and Human Services agency certifies there is a real, genuine
program in place to stop fraud and abuse in ObamaCare by stopping
taxpayer subsidies from going out the door to those who aren't
eligible. Wow, that's radical in Washington--not paying those who
aren't eligible.
This will give American taxpayers some assurance that we're
protecting their hard-earned tax dollars. President Obama has admitted
in ObamaCare it's not ready for businesses, and so he waived that.
Everyone knows it's not ready for families and workers either. Is it
asking too much to at least insist that it be ready to protect
taxpayers against a mountain of more fraud?
Now, the White House and our Democratic friends tell us, trust us,
we'll
[[Page H5524]]
verify everything before giving out taxpayer subsidies. Really? This is
from the same White House that said exchanges may accept the
applicant's attestation without further verification. This is from the
same Health and Human Services agency that had to backtrack and explain
maybe they would audit all of the applications, but not for State
exchanges; they're on their own.
Sorry, but I'm not buying it, and nor are taxpayers in my State of
Texas. Time and time again, Health and Human Services and the White
House have ducked the real details about ObamaCare. They have no real
plan in place. Meanwhile, taxpayer subsidies will fly out the door as
individuals pinky swear that their income is accurate.
Only Members of Congress who refuse to stop fraud, who enjoy wasting
taxpayer dollars, and who want to turn a blind eye to wasted money
could oppose this bill. I strongly urge a ``yes'' vote on this
legislation.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
So why are we going through the motions once again--I guess 41 times
now? Because the health care reform train is rolling. It's picking up
momentum, and the Republicans are once again trying to throw a monkey
wrench in its way. In Michigan, 14 different insurance entities are
competing. Tens and tens and tens of organizations are working to make
this work. Medicaid is now available. Republicans see this happening,
and they just can't stand the thought.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlelady
from Tennessee (Mrs. Black) who has really led the effort to stop fraud
and abuse in ObamaCare and who understands health care herself.
Mrs. BLACK. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
As Members of the people's House, protecting the American taxpayer
from fraud and abuse is absolutely a critical part of our job. And if,
like me, you spent the last few weeks visiting your constituents, you
will know that the American people are fed up and they're tired of
footing the bill for Washington's failures. That's why passing the No
Subsidies Without Verification Act is so important.
This bill would protect American taxpayers from the staggering amount
of fraud and abuse in ObamaCare exchanges by simply requiring that
ObamaCare live up to its original guarantee in their original law that
only those who certify to be eligible for taxpayer subsidies receive
them. Unfortunately, because of this administration's clandestine rule
change on the July 4 holiday, this is not currently the case. It is
estimated that as much as $50 billion of hard-earned American taxpayer
dollars could be given out in fraudulent ObamaCare subsidy claims.
Protecting the taxpayers' money is not a partisan issue. The health
care law was originally written--yes, was originally written--so that
only those who qualify would receive Federal subsidies in the
exchanges. And the Democratic controlled Senate Appropriations
Committee has passed legislation expressing their sense that
verification needs to occur before subsidies are doled out.
I urge my colleagues here in the House today to join me in helping to
protect the American taxpayer, and I call on the Senate to bring this
for a vote so that we can send a commonsense measure to the President
and protect the American taxpayer from fraud and abuse.
Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Waxman), the ranking member of the Energy and Commerce
Committee, and I ask unanimous consent that the balance of my time be
managed by the gentleman from Washington (Mr. McDermott).
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Michigan?
There was no objection.
Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time
to speak against this bill.
The American public should know what this bill is all about. It is
the 41st attempt in the House to repeal and confuse the American people
about the Affordable Care Act. It's a deliberate distortion of the
actions that have already been in place to protect the taxpayers.
We have letters from the Department of Health and Human Services as
well the Congressional Budget Office that the verification system is in
place so that taxpayers' money is being protected.
But the message that the Republicans have been sending over and over
again is that we should delay, defund, repeal, but never replace the
Affordable Care Act. If they needed further evidence to ignore, just
yesterday the nonpartisan CBO reported that HHS has already put the
verification system in place that their bill suggests we do. Mr.
Speaker, what they want to do is to create a duplicative, unworkable
process to certify a verification system, and they want to give it to
the inspector general of HHS, but the Inspector General's Office has
told us that they have no idea what this bill is proposing or what that
office would have to do. They have no experience in doing it.
So this is not a credible bill. It's a political bill. They can't
repeal the Affordable Care Act, so they're determined to keep it from
working. It's a clear effort to delay the implementation of the
Affordable Care Act.
When I was home, my constituents, particularly those who are looking
forward to the legislation going into effect, people who have had
preexisting conditions or inability to get insurance in the past, keep
on asking me: Is this really going to happen, or are the Republicans
going to stop it?
I urge a ``no'' vote on this bill because it's another effort by the
Republicans to stop health care for all Americans.
{time} 1015
Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman
from Oklahoma (Mr. Lankford), the head of the Republican Policy
Committee, and a leader in health care.
Mr. LANKFORD. Mr. Speaker, this administration's been very proud of
the work that they have done to reduce fraud in Medicare, that they
have done to reduce fraud in durable medical equipment. Just a couple
of weeks ago there was a huge bust in Puerto Rico trying to deal with
Social Security disability fraud that has happened there for years.
But for whatever reason, they have chosen, on this piece of
legislation, to look the other way, to actually turn away and say we're
going to allow people to self-verify whether they're eligible for the
subsidies, when right now people don't even know if they're eligible
for the subsidies.
If I walked up to 100 people on the street today and asked them the
two questions on that--does your employer provide you a qualified
health plan--most of them would say: I have no idea. What's a qualified
health plan?
And then if I said, Do you qualify for the subsidies?, just about
every American would say: I don't know. I have no idea.
Yet, they're being asked, when no one knows right now, to self-verify
that you know one way or the other. They don't have the information.
They don't know the information. We don't even know what's going to
happen on the exchanges yet. That's not been released yet, and it
starts in 3 weeks.
So to say to people something that doesn't even exist yet, you've got
to be able to say whether you certify for it or not, whether you can
say that, yes, I do qualify for, this is absurd.
We're just asking the simple question: Shouldn't we stick with the
original plan on this if we're going to do this?
The law itself said that it had to be certified. Then they created a
waiver out of thin air and said, no, this is going to be too
complicated; we're going to delay that for a while.
Then people say, what's your plan?
I can tell you, my State is begging to keep our own plan for Insure
Oklahoma. We're having to go back to the Federal Government and request
that we can keep the plan we've had for a while taking care of those in
poverty. This is absurd.
There is a straightforward, simple way to do this that can be done;
but, instead, we've created this convoluted mess.
Just this morning I've heard people on the other side say that the
train has left the station on this. I've heard health care reform, that
train is rolling.
[[Page H5525]]
Well, I can tell you, in the Senate the Democrats are saying, at
least some of them are saying, this is a train wreck. And I agree.
The train has left the station, and if we don't step out and say this
has to stop, then we'll continue to have more and more fraud. We have
got to take this on and take it on right now.
Mr. McDERMOTT. Mr. Speaker, I will enter into the Record four
documents. One is a letter from the President, in his opposition to the
bill. The second is technical assistance from the Inspector General,
saying they have no ability to do this. The third is a cost estimate
from CBO, and the fourth is a letter from HHS detailing their
verification plans.
Executive Office of the President, Office of Management
and Budget,
Washington, DC, September 10, 2013.
Statement of Administration Policy
H.R. 2775--No Subsidies Without Verification Act
(Rep. Black, R-TN, and 103 cosponsors)
The Administration strongly opposes House passage of H.R.
2775 because the goal of the bill is already being
accomplished while the text of the bill would create delays
that could cost millions of hard-working middle-class
families the security of affordable health coverage and care
they deserve. It is time for the Congress to stop fighting
old political battles and join the President in an agenda
focused on providing greater economic opportunity and
security for middle class families and all those working to
get into the middle-class.
The Affordable Care Act gives people greater control over
their own health care and has already improved many aspects
of the Nation's health care system. Beginning in October
2013, millions of low- and middle-income Americans will be
eligible to receive tax credits to help them purchase
insurance and cost-sharing reductions to help with out-of-
pocket expenses for coverage effective January 1, 2014. Tens
of millions of Americans who have previously been denied
coverage due to a pre-existing medical condition will now be
covered. The nearly one in two Americans under the age of 65
with pre-existing medical conditions will have the peace of
mind that comes from knowing that they cannot be dropped from
their health plan or denied coverage because of those
conditions. House passage of H.R. 2775 would undermine this
security by delaying tax credits and cost-sharing reductions
that will otherwise be provided to millions of Americans.
H.R. 2775 is unnecessary because the Secretary of Health
and Human Services has already put in place an effective and
efficient system for verification of eligibility for premium
tax credits and cost sharing reductions. Moreover, it would
create vague standards for the Inspector General, whose
office has never performed this type of prospective review,
to ``successfully and consistently'' verify eligibility. As a
result, this legislation's unnecessary pre-certification
requirement would impede opening the Marketplaces on October
1, 2013, driving up out-of-pocket health care costs for
millions of Americans and reducing timely access to much-
needed and long-denied affordable coverage.
If the President were presented with H.R. 2775, his senior
advisers would recommend that he veto the bill.
____
Technical Assistance From the Inspector General
We offer the following technical assistance on draft HR
2775, as amended, as requested. We note that this technical
assistance represents the views of the Office of Inspector
General (OIG) and does not necessarily represent the views of
the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)/the
Administration.
Page 2, line 13, as amended by the amendment: The draft
legislation would require the IG to make a certification to
Congress. We are uncertain what Congress means by a
certification. The certification function described in the
legislation is substantially outside a traditional OIG
oversight role. There is no generally accepted auditing
definition or standard for a ``certification'', nor are
certifications of the type described in the legislation among
the types of work articulated under the IG Act.
The legislation can be read as contemplating a prospective
certification occurring before the program starts operations
(or, if operations have begun, before the program has been
operational long enough for a statistically sound review of
actual operations; typically, we require more than three
months of data). As an OIG using accepted auditing and
oversight standards, it is difficult to predict whether
programs will, in fact, work as intended. More traditionally,
an OIG might review internal controls and make
recommendations to strengthen them if needed; conduct
statistically-valid, retrospective reviews of actual
operational history; or issue an opinion on design controls.
These options may be more effective for oversight of the
verification program.
Page 2, line 14, as amended by the amendment: We note that
the ``successfully and consistently'' standard articulated in
the amendment is a standard without clear meaning from an
audit perspective. It is not clear to us how this standard
would intersect with Yellow Book standards.
General comment on the legislation, as amended: While we
are not entirely clear about the scope and nature of the work
contemplated by the drafters, under any interpretation of
this draft legislation, the OIG would need to develop
additional programmatic and technical expertise in a new
program area and would need resources. Given the potential
scope of the work described in the draft legislation, the
apparent timeframe contemplated, and the serious implications
of not completing the work on an expedited basis, we would
need substantial additional resources, including auditors,
contractors, or other staff. If the certification were to
cover multiple systems (including the Federal and State-based
exchanges) or require auditing of complex operations, we
might need dozens of staff to do the work in the time
allotted. To do the certification proposed in the
legislation, or the alternative internal controls review and
retrospective reviews of operations in accordance with OIG's
historic oversight role,--as well as other essential
oversight of ACA--we need OIG's 2014 budget appropriated.
____
H.R. 2775--A bill to condition the provision of premium and
cost-sharing subsidies under the Patient Protection and
Affordable Care Act upon a certification that a program
to verify household income and other qualifications for
such subsidies is operational, and for other purposes
Summary: H.R. 2775 would make the availability of premium
tax credits and cost-sharing subsidies to eligible
individuals and families under the Affordable Care Act (ACA)
contingent on a certification to the Congress by the
Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) that a program
is in place that verifies, consistent with section 1411 of
the ACA, the household income and coverage qualifications of
people applying for such credits and cost-sharing subsidies.
Section 1411 of the ACA establishes requirements for a
program to determine whether someone meets the income and
coverage qualifications for such premium tax credits and
cost-sharing subsidies (among other things).
CBO and the staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT)
estimate that enacting H.R. 2775 would not affect direct
spending or revenues. A program is currently being put in
place to verify income and coverage qualifications for the
tax credits and subsidies, and that program appears to CBO
and JCT to be in accordance with section 1411. Accordingly,
we expect that the Secretary would certify before the
beginning of 2014, when premium tax credits and cost-sharing
subsidies would first be paid, that the requirements in H.R
2775 are satisfied.
Pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply to H.R. 2775 because
enacting the bill will not affect direct spending or revenues
in CBO and JCT's estimation.
H.R. 2775 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995 (UMRA).
Estimated Cost to the Federal Government: H.R. 2775 would
prohibit premium tax credits and cost-sharing subsidies from
being paid before the Secretary of HHS has certified to
Congress that a program is in place that verifies, in
accordance with section 1411 of the ACA, the household income
and coverage qualifications of people applying for such tax
credits and subsidies.
Section 1411 of the ACA describes a program to determine
whether someone meets income, coverage, and other
qualifications for premium tax credits and cost-sharing
subsidies. The section specifies methods for verifying the
information provided by applicants and establishes penalties
for the provision of false or fraudulent information. In
addition, section 1411 establishes reporting requirements for
individuals related to determining if the individual has an
affordable offer of insurance coverage from an employer.
Further, the section specifically grants flexibility to the
Secretary of HHS to modify the methods used for verification
of information provided by applicants.
In July, the Administration delayed for one year two
reporting requirements for certain large employers and health
insurance coverage providers. Further, regulations issued by
HHS in July provided state-based insurance exchanges with
limited flexibility when verifying applicants' household
incomes and offers of employment-based health insurance
coverage for the 2014 benefit year.
CBO and JCT do not expect that those administrative actions
and regulations, by themselves, would prohibit the Secretary
from being able to provide certification under H.R. 2775. In
particular, the reporting requirements for employers are not
covered by section 1411, and the flexibility regarding
verification that is provided in the regulations issued by
HHS appears to us to be consistent with section 1411. (The
regulations that were issued regarding verification are
slightly looser than CBO and JCT had previously expected, so
we revised our baseline projections following the
announcement of those regulations.\1\ However, in our
judgment, the regulations are consistent with the flexibility
granted the Secretary by section 1411.)
1. Congressional Budget Office, Letter to the Honorable
Paul Ryan Re: Analysis of the Administration's Announced
Delay of Certain Requirements Under the Affordable
[[Page H5526]]
Care Act (July 30, 2013), www.cbo.gov/publication/44465
Thus, CBO and JCT conclude that a program is currently
being put in place in accordance with section 1411 regarding
the verification of household income and coverage
qualifications. CBO and JCT expect that this program will be
in place by January 1, 2014, when the premium tax credits and
cost-sharing subsidies would begin to be paid. We therefore
expect that the Secretary would certify by that time that the
requirements in H.R. 2775 are satisfied, allowing premium tax
credits and cost-sharing subsidies to be made available on
schedule. As a result, we estimate that H.R. 2775 would have
no budgetary effects relative to our current baseline
projections.
This conclusion, however, is uncertain. The language of
H.R. 2775 is unclear regarding the meaning of the term
``program.'' That term might be construed to go beyond
regulations and guidance to encompass operational competence,
such as software and enrollment procedures that have been
proven to work as provided for in regulations. Determining
whether or not those systems work as provided for in
regulations, however, may not be possible until there is some
experience or data that can be used to evaluate the systems.
Estimate Prepared by: Federal Costs: Jean Hearne, Sarah
Masi, and the staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation;
Impact on State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Lisa Ramirez-
Branum; Impact on the Private Sector: Alexia Diorio.
Estimate Approved by: Holly Harvey, Deputy Assistant
Director for Budget Analysis.
____
Department of Health & Human Services, Office of the
Assistant Secretary for Legislation,
Washington, DC, August 22, 2013.
Hon. Fred Upton,
Chairman, Committee on Energy and Commerce, House of
Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Upton: The Secretary has asked that I respond
to your letter concerning eligibility determinations under
the Affordable Care Act. The Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS) has been working tirelessly to implement the
Affordable Care Act to ensure that on October 1, 2013,
millions of Americans will have access to quality, affordable
health coverage, including private insurance plans through
the Marketplaces. This work includes close collaboration with
other federal agencies and the states to ensure a consumer-
friendly experience for individuals, families, and small
businesses applying for coverage while implementing
appropriate verification procedures and safeguards to protect
federal taxpayer dollars.
It is important to note that verification of income and
employer-sponsored coverage applies only to individuals and
families seeking financial assistance in the Marketplaces
through the insurance affordability programs, which include
Medicaid, the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP),
premium tax credits, and cost-sharing reductions. Federal
regulations at 45 CFR 155.320 provide detailed verification
procedures for household income and eligibility for and
enrollment in employer-sponsored coverage for individuals and
families applying for insurance affordability programs.
The Marketplace will check the income information submitted
by every individual applying for insurance affordability
programs by comparing it with data from tax filings and
Social Security data, and in many cases, with the additional
use of current wage information that is available
electronically. The multi-step process begins when an
individual applies for an insurance affordability program
through the Marketplace and affirms or inputs his or her
projected annual household income. The Marketplace then
compares the applicant's projected annual household income
with information available from the Internal Revenue Service
(IRS) and Social Security Administration (SSA). If the data
submitted by the applicant cannot be verified by the
Marketplace using IRS and SSA data, then the information is
compared with wage information from employers provided by
Equifax Workforce Solutions (Equifax), which is under
contract with HHS to provide this information. If Equifax
data does not substantiate the applicant's inputted income,
the Marketplace will request an explanation or additional
documentation from the applicant.
When documentation is requested, the regulations, at 45 CFR
155.315 (f)(4)(ii), specify that if the consumer meets all
other eligibility requirements, he or she will be provided
with time-limited advanced payments of the premium tax
credits and cost-sharing reductions based on his or her
attestation to projected household income, while
documentation is gathered and submitted to the Marketplace.
If documentation is requested and is not provided within the
specified timeframe (90 days, which may be extended based on
the applicant's good faith efforts to obtain required
documentation), the statute specifies that the Marketplace
will base its eligibility determination on data from IRS and
SSA. If no data from IRS is available, the Marketplace will
discontinue advanced payments of premium tax credits and
cost-sharing reductions.
For eligibility for 2014 only, we recently indicated that
HHS will exercise enforcement discretion such that a
Marketplace may choose to request additional documentation
from a statistically-significant sample of the group of
individuals in only one specific situation: when the
Marketplace has IRS data, the applicant attests to projected
annual household income that is more than ten percent below
IRS and SSA data, Equifax data is unavailable, and the
individual does not provide a reasonable explanation for the
inconsistency between the attestation and IRS and SSA data.
In all other cases in which the data submitted by the
individual cannot be verified using IRS and SSA data or
Equifax data, and the individual does not provide a
reasonable explanation for any discrepancy identified between
their attestation and electronic data, the Marketplace must
request additional documentation. This includes, for example,
all cases in which IRS data is not available for an
individual, and the attestation to projected annual household
income cannot be verified using Equifax data; and all cases
in which there is both IRS data and Equifax data for an
individual but the attestation to projected annual household
income cannot be verified using that data.
We have clarified that, for the Federally-facilitated
Marketplace, CMS intends to set the initial size of the
sample at 100 percent, such that everyone who is in the
circumstance described above in which sampling may be used is
asked to submit satisfactory documentation. Since publication
of the final rule, we have ascertained that there are
sufficient resources to ask every individual in this
circumstance for such documentation with no exceptions.
State-based Marketplaces may choose to use other sample
sizes, provided that they are statistically significant for
2014. As described in 45 CFR 155.320(c)(3)(vi)(F), if
satisfactory documentation is not submitted by the end of the
resolution period, the Marketplace will determine eligibility
based on the IRS and SSA data.
With respect to verification of employer-sponsored
coverage, section 1411(a) of the Affordable Care Act requires
the Secretary to establish a program for determining
eligibility for enrollment in a qualified health plan (QHP)
through the Marketplace, advance payments of premium tax
credits, and cost-sharing reductions. Section 1411(b) of the
Affordable Care Act requires applicants for insurance
affordability programs to provide specific information
regarding employer-sponsored coverage, and section 1411(d) of
the Affordable Care Act requires the Secretary to verify the
accuracy of this information, ``in such manner as the
Secretary determines appropriate.''
The Marketplace requests and verifies employer-sponsored
coverage information as part of the eligibility determination
process for advance payments of the premium tax credit and
cost-sharing reductions. Regulations at 45 CFR 155.320(d)
specify that the Marketplace must verify an applicant's
access to employer-sponsored coverage through data available
to the Marketplace. The Marketplace will have access to
electronic data sources for verifying access to employer-
sponsored coverage through the Office of Personnel Management
(OPM) federal employment data and data from the Small
Business Health Options Program (SHOP) Marketplace operating
in its state, where available. If discrepancies are
identified using either OPM or SHOP data, the Marketplace
will notify the applicant and request additional information.
If the applicant does not adequately resolve the discrepancy
with additional information, the Marketplace will make a
final decision based on information obtained from the
electronic data sources. A Marketplace may also use
additional available electronic data sources that have been
approved by HHS for this purpose, based on evidence that the
sources are sufficiently current, accurate, and minimize
administrative burden.
An individual who applies for insurance affordability
programs and has income in the premium tax credit range will
input information related to whether or not he or she has
access to employer-sponsored coverage that meets the minimum
value standard. This process is assisted by the Employer
Coverage Tool, a page that is included in the Marketplace's
single, streamlined application that will help applicants
gather information about any employer health coverage for
which they are eligible. Applicants may ask their employer to
help fill out the Employer Coverage Tool, or employers may
make this information available in other ways, such as by
making it part of the notice specified in section 18B of the
Fair Labor Standards Act.
The Marketplace then compares the applicant-supplied
employer coverage information with information from OPM and
the SHOP, where the Marketplace has access to SHOP data. When
information provided by an applicant is inconsistent with OPM
or SHOP data, the Marketplace will provide a period of 90
days for the applicant to provide satisfactory documentation
or otherwise resolve the inconsistency. Consistent with
general Marketplace verification procedures, eligibility for
advance payments of the premium tax credits and cost-sharing
reductions is provided during the period, to the extent that
the applicant is otherwise eligible and attests that he or
she understands that any advance premium tax credit paid is
subject to reconciliation by the IRS. If documentation is not
provided within the specified timeframe (90 days, which may
be extended based on the applicant's good faith efforts to
obtain required documentation), or documentation provided is
not sufficient to resolve the inconsistency, the Marketplace
[[Page H5527]]
will make the determination based on available electronic
data.
For eligibility for 2014 only, the Marketplace has the
flexibility to identify a statistically-significant sample of
the applicant population for which OPM, SHOP, or an approved
state-based data source do not have available data, and
request information regarding employer-sponsored coverage
from their employers. The Federally-facilitated Marketplace
will conduct the sample-based review and will collect a
robust set of data from the income and employer verification
process. This data, and information gathered by State-based
Marketplaces that are conducting similar reviews, will be
used as the basis for analysis to support the development of
targeted verification strategies and future enhancements to
the verification process.
It is important to note that advance payments of premium
tax credits are provided directly to the health insurance
plan, not to the consumer. In addition, individuals seeking
to purchase insurance in the Marketplace must attest, under
penalty of perjury, that they are not filing false
information. The Affordable Care Act also provides for
penalties when an individual provides false or fraudulent
information. Individuals on whose behalf tax credits are
provided must acknowledge, before they receive advance
payments of the tax credit, that they understand that the
payments are reconciled at the close of the year. They must
also file income taxes for the year in which the credit is
received. All advance payments of premium tax credits are
reconciled with the IRS at the close of the year.
With respect to your questions about the employer
responsibility requirements, as noted in previous
correspondence, decisions regarding administrative action
with respect to sections 6055, 6056 and 4980H of the Internal
Revenue Code remain under the purview of the Department of
the Treasury.
Although HHS regularly works with and communicates with
other federal departments that share responsibility for
implementation of the Affordable Care Act, particularly with
respect to programs or provisions that are cross-cutting, it
is important to note that the Department of the Treasury's
decision to provide transition relief with respect to insurer
and employer reporting requirements under the Internal
Revenue Code has no impact on the process for verifying
employer-sponsored coverage. HHS' policy regarding
verification of employer sponsored coverage was articulated
in a series of regulatory documents beginning in August 2011,
culminating in the final rule, published on July 15, 2013.
Throughout the development of this policy HHS has been clear
that we would verify the availability of employer-sponsored
coverage against available electronic data sources.
HHS is committed to the successful enrollment of millions
of Americans into qualified health plans through the
Marketplace, and to ensuring that individuals receive the
financial assistance for which they are eligible. Please let
me know if you have any additional questions.
Sincerely,
Jim R. Esquea,
Assistant Secretary for Legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
We're here today because we're supposed to be dealing with the CR,
continuing the funding of the Federal Government. But the Republicans
are scrapping among themselves and can't figure out what to do.
Now, right now, medical research in my district and across this
country is grinding to a halt. Grant money is disappearing,
laboratories are closing, and potentially world-transforming projects
are being set aside. Researchers are being laid off, and students are
discouraged from entering the field. There is no end in sight.
Now, the question you have to ask yourself is, why is the sequester
not being dealt with?
It's the mechanism that's breaking our economy for the future because
innovation, research, and our ability to compete in the global
marketplace depends on research, which starts now continuously, not to
mention the lifesaving cures and treatments we're losing because of
these empty labs.
So what are we doing here today?
Thank God for ObamaCare. We've got something to do. We can try and
repeal it for the 41st time.
ObamaCare, folks, is not going away. It's about to take off. In
Washington, Oregon and California, we can't wait. The rest of the
States may be sitting on their hands, but we aren't.
And the fact is, even Senator Cruz from Texas says ``you aren't going
to win this one.''
Now, maybe these endless, pathetic kind of tantrums that we have out
here every 2 weeks wouldn't matter if there weren't so many much more
important things that need to be done.
We get it. I mean, we really do understand it. The American people
even get it, that the Republicans really, really, really, really,
really don't like this law. But can't we move on?
Stop screaming about wanting a budget and pass one. You've had the
budget; you put the people forward to go and have a conference
committee.
Quit dancing around with the CR. America needs jobs, and you can do
something about it. It's not just some force of nature we can't
control. Our economy is weak because we're starving it. Let's do
something about that, instead of this biweekly announcement that you
dislike access to affordable care.
I urge my colleagues to vote ``no.''
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman
from Arkansas (Mr. Griffin), a key member of the Ways and Means
Committee.
Mr. GRIFFIN of Arkansas. Mr. Speaker, when I look across this country
and look at who opposes the President's health care law, ObamaCare,
it's not just Republicans. The New York Times today says the AFL-CIO is
fed up with the law and ready to get it repealed if they can't fix it.
Employers across this country are fed up with it. That's why the
President delayed it for a year till after the elections.
Come on, let's get a grip and face reality.
But my dislike of the law aside, that's not what this is about. This
is about the Federal Government handing out money without verifying
who's getting it. That's ludicrous. It's unbelievable.
We have to verify, when I, as an Army Reservist, sign up for TRICARE
Select, because now I'm thrown into the ObamaCare exchanges. If you buy
alcohol, you have to show an ID. I mean, this is pretty basic.
We just want to verify who's getting government cash. That's it. And
that's why I support the bill. It's common sense. Let's pass it.
Mr. McDERMOTT. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Doggett).
Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, 19 days, in just 19 days, millions of
working Americans can apply to receive premium assistance tax credits
to help them get health insurance. These are neighbors who were
previously denied coverage, or who were excluded because of a
preexisting condition, or because a small employer could not afford to
provide health insurance.
And today's bill is about one thing, and that is to deny those
Americans their lawful opportunity, on October 1, to obtain health care
security. This bill is certainly not about fraud because there is
already a comprehensive system to prevent overpayment and verify
income.
This very afternoon, a family that suffers severe injuries in a
traffic accident on I-35, or a San Antonio family that is notified of a
dread disease, those families that lack affordable health insurance are
suddenly overwhelmed with medical bills, and they deserve an
alternative; and that alternative is coming on October 1, if these
folks can't stop it.
This bill would pull the affordability rug right out from under our
working families, just as they're beginning to learn about its
availability.
Yes, this is the 41st time that they've tried to delay and dismantle
and deny the rights of American working families. We know it won't be
their last vote. In fact, next week they're so intent on blocking
American families from getting health insurance coverage, they're
willing to shut down the entire Federal Government.
And as if that weren't enough, next month they propose to default on
the full faith and credit of the United States of America for the first
time in our history for the sole purpose of denying American families
that don't have insurance now some health security.
I think it's wrong. They talk about trust. Well, I don't think we
should trust these zealots with our health care future.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Washington has 3 minutes
remaining. The gentleman from Texas has 1\1/2\ minutes remaining.
Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, yielding myself 15 seconds,
yesterday we learned the Federal Government is paying millions of
dollars to prisoners for unemployment benefits, millions of dollars of
your money to cons in prison. But don't worry, we'll stop the fraud in
ObamaCare.
[[Page H5528]]
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McDERMOTT. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
New Jersey (Mr. Pascrell).
Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, like my Republican colleagues, I too am
concerned about fraud in any public program, whether it's ObamaCare,
food stamps, Medicare. Who could be against verification?
But this is not about verification. Again, the 41st failed attempt to
submarine reform in health care.
The question before us today is whether or not the risk of fraud in
ObamaCare is so pervasive that we should shut down an essential part of
the law.
My friends on the other side would have you believe that the
administration's decision to delay income and coverage verifications
leaves the health care marketplace vulnerable to rampant fraud. This is
not the case.
First, federally operated and partnership exchanges still will verify
such information beginning in 2014. Only 16 States and the District of
Columbia will wait until 2015 to begin more comprehensive verification.
In those instances, the incentive to provide false information is
greatly overshadowed by the benefit of doing so. Lying on the exchange
form carries with it a penalty of $25,000. On top of that, anyone who
provides false income information will have to pay back the extra
subsidies when filing a tax form for 2014.
Additionally, States will audit a statistically significant number of
individuals, meaning that everyone has an equal opportunity to be
audited.
Finally, fighting fraud requires an investment of funding and
resources.
How dare you get up here and talk about a plan when you, in the
regular budget, want to cut every penny from resources, from research,
from helping us get to the point where American people will be served.
Look, you can't stand success. Help us improve the system, not
continue a system where patients are playing second fiddle.
Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time in
case the gentleman from Washington has additional speakers or would
like to close on his side. We are prepared to close.
Mr. McDERMOTT. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer) to close our arguments.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, let's be clear: this is not about the
integrity of the tax system. There are any number of areas where we
rely far more on discretion to individual taxpayers, and there's no
appetite, actually, to move in those areas.
My Republican friends are not interested in providing adequate
resources to the IRS to be able to appropriately enforce the tax law
right now, and we have hundreds of billions of dollars of taxes that
aren't collected.
But this is part of a mean-spirited and shortsighted effort to
sabotage the health care reform effort. Bear in mind what's going on in
States around the country.
In Missouri, the Republican legislature has been on a rampage that
will even make it illegal for State employees to tell Missourians what
they're entitled to under State law. This is a new low in, I think,
political malpractice.
The Republicans are willing to flirt with shutting down the American
Government in their attempt to prevent Americans from getting health
care they're entitled to under the law. This is wrong.
I strongly urge that we reject this mean-spirited approach.
Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, as I yield the balance of our time
to the gentlelady from Tennessee, I make the case, this is simply
choice. Those who want to stop fraud in ObamaCare support this bill.
Those who want to turn a blind eye to that fraud oppose it.
I yield the balance of my time to the gentlewoman from Tennessee
(Mrs. Black).
Mrs. BLACK. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, in closing, even the White House veto threat actually
proves the need for the No Subsidies Without Verification Act.
The White House says that H.R. 2775, which simply requires the
administration to verify whether people are eligible for taxpayer-
funded ObamaCare subsidies before they're doled out, would create
delays is what they say. It would create delays.
But the veto threat then goes on to say that the bill is
``unnecessary'' because the administration officials claim they already
have, ``an effective and efficient system for verification and
eligibility.''
So which is it?
Does the Obama administration have a way, other than the honor
system, to verify whether someone is eligible for taxpayer subsidies or
will requiring the administration to have one create delays?
{time} 1030
If they had a transparent verification system in place, one that
actually worked, this bill would create no delays. The administration
should actually welcome it, and so should all Members of this body, who
should vote for this. That's why we need this bill. We need independent
verification that programs are in place before taxpayers' subsidies go
out the door.
For all taxpayers, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on H.R. 2775.
Mr. DANNY K. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong
opposition to H.R. 2775, the No Subsidies without Verification Act
sponsored by my good friend from Tennessee, Representative Black. I
oppose because the goal of this bill is already being accomplished
under provisions of the Affordable Care Act. Passage of this bill would
simply bog down what is already being done and could cost hard-working
middle class Americans millions. The security of knowing that they have
the affordable health insurance coverage they deserve and need. For all
practical purpose, one could say that this is the forty-first time that
the House has sought to repeal (to no avail) the Affordable Care Act.
It is not going to happen! Let's move on so that millions of low and
middle income Americans will be eligible to receive tax credits to help
them purchase insurance to the tens of millions of Americans who have
previously been denied coverage due to preexisting medical conditions
will knowing that they can have coverage, peace of mind and the
healthcare they need.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired.
Pursuant to House Resolution 339, the previous question is ordered on
the bill, as amended.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third
reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was
read the third time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. McDERMOTT. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, this 15-
minute vote on passage of the bill will be followed by a 5-minute vote
on approval of the Journal, if ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 235,
nays 191, not voting 6, as follows:
[Roll No. 458]
YEAS--235
Aderholt
Alexander
Amash
Amodei
Bachmann
Bachus
Barletta
Barr
Barrow (GA)
Barton
Benishek
Bentivolio
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Bridenstine
Brooks (AL)
Brooks (IN)
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Burgess
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Coble
Coffman
Cole
Collins (GA)
Collins (NY)
Conaway
Cook
Cotton
Cramer
Crawford
Crenshaw
Culberson
Daines
Davis, Rodney
Denham
Dent
DeSantis
DesJarlais
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers
Farenthold
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gardner
Garrett
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gibson
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grimm
Guthrie
Hall
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Heck (NV)
Hensarling
Holding
Hudson
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Joyce
Kelly (PA)
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kline
Labrador
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Lance
Lankford
Latham
Latta
Lipinski
[[Page H5529]]
LoBiondo
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Marchant
Marino
Massie
Matheson
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Meadows
Meehan
Messer
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Mullin
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Palazzo
Paulsen
Pearce
Perry
Peterson
Petri
Pittenger
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Radel
Reed
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rice (SC)
Rigell
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothfus
Royce
Runyan
Ryan (WI)
Salmon
Sanford
Scalise
Schock
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Southerland
Stewart
Stivers
Stockman
Stutzman
Terry
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Turner
Upton
Valadao
Wagner
Walberg
Walden
Walorski
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Williams
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Yoho
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)
NAYS--191
Andrews
Barber
Bass
Beatty
Becerra
Bera (CA)
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Brownley (CA)
Bustos
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Cardenas
Carney
Carson (IN)
Cartwright
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Courtney
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis, Danny
DeFazio
DeGette
Delaney
DeLauro
DelBene
Deutch
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle
Duckworth
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Enyart
Eshoo
Esty
Farr
Fattah
Foster
Frankel (FL)
Fudge
Gabbard
Gallego
Garamendi
Garcia
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hanabusa
Hastings (FL)
Heck (WA)
Higgins
Himes
Hinojosa
Holt
Honda
Horsford
Hoyer
Huffman
Israel
Jackson Lee
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilmer
Kind
Kirkpatrick
Kuster
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis
Loebsack
Lofgren
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lujan Grisham (NM)
Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
Lynch
Maffei
Maloney, Carolyn
Maloney, Sean
Matsui
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McNerney
Meeks
Meng
Michaud
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (FL)
Napolitano
Neal
Negrete McLeod
Nolan
O'Rourke
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters (CA)
Peters (MI)
Pingree (ME)
Pocan
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Rangel
Richmond
Roybal-Allard
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell (AL)
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Sinema
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Speier
Swalwell (CA)
Takano
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Titus
Tonko
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Vargas
Veasey
Vela
Velazquez
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Yarmuth
NOT VOTING--6
Diaz-Balart
Herrera Beutler
McCarthy (NY)
Nadler
Rush
Visclosky
{time} 1101
Messrs. BERA of California and VELA changed their vote from ``yea''
to ``nay.''
Mr. WALBERG changed his vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
So the bill was passed.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________