[Congressional Record Volume 159, Number 131 (Saturday, September 28, 2013)]
[House]
[Pages H5975-H5985]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF THE SENATE AMENDMENT TO H.J. RES. 59,
CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS RESOLUTION, 2014, AND PROVIDING FOR
CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 3210, PAY OUR MILITARY ACT
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I
call up House Resolution 366 and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:
H. Res. 366
Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be
in order to take from the Speaker's table the joint
resolution (H.J. Res. 59) making continuing appropriations
for fiscal year 2014, and for other purposes, with the Senate
amendment thereto, and to consider in the House, without
intervention of any point of order, a motion offered by the
chair of the Committee on Appropriations or his designee that
the House concur in the Senate amendment with each of the two
amendments printed in the report of the Committee on Rules
accompanying this resolution. The Senate amendment and the
motion shall be considered as read. The motion shall be
debatable for one hour equally divided and controlled by the
chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on
Appropriations. The previous question shall be considered as
ordered on the motion to its adoption without intervening
motion or demand for division of the question except that the
question of adoption of the motion shall be divided between
the two House amendments.
Sec. 2. Upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in
order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 3210) making
continuing appropriations for military pay in the event of a
Government shutdown. All points of order against
consideration of the bill are waived. The bill shall be
considered as read. All points of order against provisions in
the bill are waived. The previous question shall be
considered as ordered on the bill and on any amendment
thereto to final passage without intervening motion except:
(1) 40 minutes of debate equally divided and controlled by
the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on
Appropriations; and (2) one motion to recommit.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 1
hour.
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield
the customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms.
Slaughter), the ranking member of the committee and my friend, pending
which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration
of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.
General Leave
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their
remarks.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Texas?
There was no objection.
Mr. SESSIONS. House Resolution 366 provides for consideration of the
Senate amendment to H.J. Res. 59, the Continuing Appropriations Act for
Fiscal Year 2014, and a closed rule for consideration of H.R. 3210, the
Pay Our Military Act of 2013.
Mr. Speaker, at midnight on Monday, just 2 days from now, the Federal
Government will shut down if Congress does not act to provide the
necessary appropriations. The legislation before us today will ensure
that a shutdown does not happen; and, if adopted, the House amendments
would make important steps to ensure that ObamaCare, the Affordable
Care Act that President Obama and every Democrat voted for, does not
have the opportunity to hurt American jobs and drag down our economy.
The first of these three amendments would repeal the medical device
tax included in ObamaCare. This medical device tax is also known as
what might be the tax that will harm not only the creation of
investment but also the products of medical devices, including
pacemakers and other medical products that keep America's health care a
leading edge. The medical device industry provides our Nation with
innovative health care services as well as much-needed jobs for many,
many hardworking Americans. ObamaCare's onerous medical device tax--
what we also call the pacemaker tax--is already causing job loss in
this industry and negatively impacting innovation of new and other
lifesaving devices.
I would like to insert into the Record a letter from a gentleman from
Dallas, Texas, Mr. Walt Humann, CEO of OstoeMed, who came to my office
over a year ago in June of 2012. He spoke with me about how innovative
medical devices clearly help not only Americans, but doctors perform
very difficult and leading-edge surgeries. And I will tell you that Mr.
Humann spoke very clearly about how this onerous tax would literally
tax the production, not the sale, but the production of medical devices
to an industry that needs more and more innovation. That clearly
explains the damaging effects that this has on American businesses. His
letter, Mr. Speaker, clearly outlines how it harms not only his
company, but the industry as a whole.
The second amendment would delay all aspects of ObamaCare for 1 year.
This proposal is an important step to prevent the costly job-killing
regulations contained in President Obama's health care plan from
becoming an unfortunate reality. The President has already delayed
several pieces of the law; and just as he begins to see how ill-
conceived and unworkable his plan is, it's time for us to stop it dead
in its tracks. So much for the hundreds of waivers that he has issued;
so much for him delaying for his friends in business; so much for him
delaying the pieces that he wants to, knowing that the harm will be on
individuals all across America. It makes sense to delay the entire law
for a year in an effort to protect American families from paying higher
health care premiums and having fewer options.
This is important, and the Republican Party is on the floor of the
House of Representatives today on behalf of taxpayers and what we
believe is about 60 percent of Americans who are opposed to this bill
starting to work October 1. So that's why we are here.
Finally, this rule provides for consideration of H.R. 3210, the Pay
Our Military Act. This important piece of legislation is designed to
ensure that our Nation's men and women in the military continue to
receive their paychecks in the event that the Senate does not adopt a
responsible CR and forces our government into a shutdown.
Our Nation's military puts their lives on the line, and they have
throughout the history of our country. They remain engaged in combat
operations as we go to sleep tonight. They are protecting this great
Nation, and the services that the men and women of the military provide
to the United States of America should be aided and helped, and we
should make sure that we do not stop the pay to the men and women
[[Page H5976]]
of the United States military. In the event of a government shutdown,
this body should take the necessary measures to ensure that our
servicemen and -women continue to be compensated for their services.
So, Mr. Speaker, we have finished a Rules Committee meeting upstairs.
We spoke about this, the impacts, at the committee hearing that allowed
Mrs. Lowey, on behalf of the minority, and Mr. Hal Rogers, our
Appropriations Committee chairman, to talk about the important part of
what we're trying to do today.
So I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the rule and ``yes'' on
the underlying legislation.
I reserve the balance of my time.
OsteoMed,
June 5, 2012.
Hon. Pete Sessions,
House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Dear Representative Sessions: Thank you for taking time to
visit with me last week regarding OsteoMed and my concerns
about the significant ``headwinds'' we face, especially
related to the 2.3% medical device tax that is scheduled for
implementation in 2013. On behalf of OsteoMed's 400
employees, I thank you for your support of H.R. 436, which
would repeal this onerous provision that otherwise will
negatively impact innovation and job creation at a time when
we can least afford it.
As president & CEO of OsteoMed, a dynamic, 20 year old
surgical device manufacturing company based in your district,
I confront the challenges that America's innovators face
every day. In addition to challenges with the FDA and
reimbursement, this 2.3% excise tax--which is on gross sales,
whether or not a business has any profits--will directly
impact our ability to create new jobs, invest in research and
development and effectively compete in the global market.
OsteoMed formed a new subsidiary company a couple of years
ago to develop an innovative spine product that greatly
simplifies spine fusion surgery and improves patient
outcomes. OsteoMed launched this product last year which
quickly grew to almost $5MM in sales in 2011 and currently
employs a number of highly skilled, high paid individuals.
Due to the significant upfront investment and on-going
development costs, this new company is not projected to make
a profit in the near future but is nevertheless subject to
the device tax which will further delay this subsidiary's
success. As a result, OsteoMed has now delayed additional new
product developments and personnel in order to make ``ends
meet'' and achieve the returns initially envisioned when this
company was created.
OsteoMed's core business manufactures surgical implant
systems for use in craniofacial, neurosurgical and small bone
orthopedic (upper and lower extremities) surgeries. These
systems require extensive, specialized instruments that are
typically not sold, but are used to implant the devices that
drive OsteoMed's revenue stream. The device tax will not only
tax gross product revenues, but my understanding is it will
also tax the instruments OsteoMed must invest in and place
into hospitals at no charge thereby further reducing my
company's profit opportunities and forcing expense reductions
in other areas in order to achieve our profit goals.
OsteoMed's products are sold through a variety of sales
channels and will require a new level of administrative
burden in order to track the ``gross'' revenues defined by
this tax. This requirement, along with the recent challenges
imposed by the Physician Payment Sunshine Act, force
additional levels of administration and non value added
expenses that male OsteoMed less competitive and viable.
The market in which OsteoMed competes is in turmoil and has
become increasingly competitive with many new offshore
competitors. As economics and recent government restrictions
have largely removed surgeons from the surgical device
purchase decision process, hospitals are now forcing
increasingly price concessions. Despite increased raw
material and labor costs, OsteoMed has been unable to raise
product prices over the past several years and is now equally
unlikely to simply pass along the device tax to our
customers.
Like any other responsible business, OsteoMed must
carefully manage expenses in order to make profit and
continue to grow and succeed. In order to cover the shortfall
the new device tax will create, OsteoMed has already started
to implement cut backs in its operations including the delay/
cancellation of new product development projects and the
hiring of additional personnel, including biomedical
engineering positions. It should be noted that OsteoMed is
also aggressively re-directing its business focus to
international markets that provide a less cumbersome and
lengthy regulatory pathway with revenue streams that are not
subject to the medical device tax . . . immediately
``saving'' 2.3% in the process. In the past month, OsteoMed
initiated the search for sales managers in China and the
Middle East to supplement recent managers hired in Korea and
Italy. Unfortunately, OsteoMed has already started to
effectively trade U.S. jobs for overseas positions as a
direct result of the medical device tax and other
governmental involvement.
The medical device industry not only provides numerous
highly skilled and attractive jobs across the U.S., but it
also pays its workers on average 40% more than the typical
job. We are a vibrant sector of the economy and one of the
few remaining industries that produces a healthy export of
products. Tragically, this industry has now become the focus
of misguided and short-term government intervention and the
growth and continued prosperity of this proud American
industry now faces great hurdles.
Again, I thank you for your service to our country and
specifically for your support of H.R. 436 to repeal this tax
and to help America's innovators continue to improve patient
care and drive job creation. I look forward to your ability
to visit OsteoMed when you are back in Dallas so you can see
firsthand our great employees and the innovative products
they produce to help people around the world. Please do not
hesitate to contact me to discuss this issue or any other
issues impacting the medical device industry.
Sincerely,
Walter J. Humann,
President & CEO, OsteoMed.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague and gentleman for
yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I
may consume.
What we have before us today is not a solution; it's another attempt
to undermine the Affordable Care Act. As written, this dangerous
proposal has no chance of becoming law. It is not only a political
nonstarter but a bad Federal policy. According to the nonpartisan
Congressional Budget Office, a repeal of the medical device tax alone
would add $30 billion to the Federal deficit.
However, finding a solution to the crisis before us may not be the
majority's top priority. Based upon news reports from earlier in the
day, it seems that far from responsible governing, the majority is
concerned with simply keeping their political house of cards from
falling down.
According to POLITICO, Majority Leader Eric Cantor said:
We've had enough disunity in our party. The headlines are
Republicans fighting Republicans. This will unite us.
By now, the majority's inability to find consensus within its own
ranks is well known. It started almost as soon as they assumed power,
as extremists within their own party refused to provide relief aid to
victims of Hurricane Sandy for more than 3 months. Divisions within the
majority also led to the first ever expiration of the Violence Against
Women Act in over 20 years; most recently, a failure on the House floor
to pass a bipartisan farm bill, which had never happened before. The
bill had been 5 years in the making, and they couldn't get it done.
Unable to find consensus on even the most noncontroversial bills, the
majority has held more than 41 votes on the one issue that unites them.
If we are to believe the majority leader, the one issue that unites
them is to try to kill the health care bill for Americans.
Now, polls have shown that the American people want action on
everything from strengthening gun laws to passing immigration reform.
Yet, instead of addressing any of these issues, the majority has tried
any way they can to repeal, defund, undermine, delay, whatever, the
historic health care law. And remember that Presidents--most of them
since the time of Teddy Roosevelt--have tried to achieve health care.
Frustration has reached a boiling point within the majority's ranks.
Republican Senator John McCain has declared parts of his own party
``whacko birds'' and said:
Many in this group didn't come to power to get things done.
They came to power to keep things from getting done.
Well said, Senator.
By now, the majority is well aware that a 1-year delay in the
Affordable Care Act threatens access to secure and affordable health
care for millions of Americans and that my Democrat colleagues and I
refuse to take away health care for American families just because the
majority is unable and unwilling to find common ground.
And oh, by the way, we've done nothing about the business of the
House. We're doing this resolution, in the first place, because the
appropriations bills were not dealt with.
In fact, the whole process has changed here. What used to be the
committee process and then go to Rules and then go to the floor has
changed; you just go directly to Rules. I would sure like to see the
old days come back.
[[Page H5977]]
The fact of the matter is this bill will be dead on arrival once it's
sent to the Senate. Senator Reid has made that abundantly clear all day
long. For the majority to continue to bring it forward shows that
today's proposal is nothing more than an attempt to seek political
cover as Republicans shut the government down.
Today, Senator Harry Reid said:
The American people will not be extorted by Tea Party
anarchists. To be absolutely clear, the Senate will reject
both the 1-year delay of the Affordable Care Act and the
repeal of the medical device tax. After weeks of futile
political games from Republicans, we are still at square one.
As if this weren't enough, the process that has led us here has
trampled upon the majority's promises of an open and transparent House.
Unlike the process that led to the passage of the Affordable Care Act,
today's legislation was written behind closed doors, leaving out almost
half of the Members of the House of Representatives, the Democrat
Party. There was absolutely no input at all from members of the
minority, and that is definitely unlike the health care act, which went
through the full committee process.
This afternoon, the majority met in the basement of the Capitol.
After a secretive, closed-door meeting, they emerged with this partisan
legislation in hand and told us to take it or leave it.
Mr. Speaker, every single one of us was elected by our fellow
citizens and told to do our part in building a more prosperous country.
With the closed, secretive, and partisan process that the majority has
repeatedly pursued, they are shutting out half the Chamber and half of
our country from participating in a democratic process.
In closing, the majority has every right to pursue their legislative
priorities, no matter how misguided we may feel they are, but they do
not have the right to take the Nation hostage nor threaten the full
faith and credit of the United States in order to get their way.
Let me be clear: a vote for this rule and a vote for this bill are
affirmative votes for a government shutdown, because everyone here
knows there will be no adequate time for any more ping-ponging. I
strongly urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the rule and the
underlying legislation.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I am intrigued by the notion today that Republicans were meeting
secretively. In fact, we have had several meetings over the past few
days, and probably two or three today, and the nature of that is to
make sure that our Members, some 233 Republican Members across this
country, that Republican leadership like myself is hearing from them,
that we are moving together and talking about the terrible and
disastrous effects of ObamaCare and how we're going to work together.
{time} 2000
Some of the common things that have been talked about in those
meetings, as if we need to remind ourselves--but I will again--in that
ObamaCare bill, $716 billion was cut and taken away from senior health
care to go directly to ObamaCare. But we've also seen the real effects
of ObamaCare, as we know that since ObamaCare has been passed, there
have been 7 part-time jobs created for every one new full-time job.
Mr. Speaker, we're here on the floor of the House of Representatives
because our country is in trouble. This is a continually difficult time
for Americans back home not just to find work, but to keep work.
We find that large companies, these large corporations that are
talked about from time to time on this floor, especially by our
friends, are moving people off the health care that they're on because
it makes sense to do it, but also because of the expense.
We saw just in the last few weeks large companies like UPS and
Walgreens move their employees and make very, very difficult decisions.
Just like Delta Air Lines had to make a decision. They announced that
ObamaCare alone would cost Delta Air Lines over $100 million next year
alone.
These are destructive and devastating consequences of ObamaCare. The
Republican Party is on the floor because this law is going to start
very quickly: October 1 and January 1. People begin signing up October
1.
Of course, what we've seen is the President very clearly over the
last few years has given waivers to the people that he chose to give
waivers to. He turned around and let business off the hook. But he
keeps the law on individuals. He keeps this onerous law on
individuals--and it's causing chaos and panic.
It's causing chaos for people like my family and others who have
children that they have to take care of that are sometimes disabled.
And we are seeing problems because now we're not sure in this mix who
will be the doctor. Will that be a doctor we've gone to in the past?
Will that be a doctor that one time we may see and another time we may
not see?
There is uncertainty. And this uncertainty has been driven to what I
believe has become reality. And the reality is, if you look, there is a
CBS and New York Times poll showing that a majority of Americans
disapprove of ObamaCare. And when a majority of Americans say this to
CBS News and The New York Times, I think even our colleagues, the
Democrats, should listen.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 4 minutes to the
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), my distinguished colleague
on the Rules Committee.
Mr. McGOVERN. I thank the gentlelady for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, there is supposed to be an orderly, thoughtful process
around here. Just in case any of my colleagues were asleep in high
school civics the day they taught how a bill becomes law, let me go
over it slowly.
The House holds hearings and markups in subcommittees and committees,
brings a bill to the floor, debates it, votes on amendments, and then
votes on final passage. The Senate does the same thing. Then, the House
and the Senate meet in a conference committee, agree to a final
package, vote on that, and send it to the President for him to either
sign or veto.
Does any of this sound even vaguely familiar to my Republican
colleagues? Because they did a ``Schoolhouse Rock'' cartoon about it
and everything.
Instead, here we are, just a matter of days--hours, really--from a
Republican-caused government shutdown. Here we are with yet another
completely unnecessary, deeply harmful, politically motivated crisis.
My Republican friends have made it clear that they will not vote for
a continuing resolution unless that bill strips funding to implement
the Affordable Health Care Act, or ObamaCare. But here's the problem,
Mr. Speaker. Mitt Romney tried to make that same argument in the 2012
election. And he lost badly--by 5 million votes. Republicans tried to
argue against ObamaCare in the Senate elections. And they lost. They
tried to make those same arguments in the House elections, and they
lost by about 1 million votes. Thanks to some ingenious redistricting,
though, they were able to keep their majority.
And now they're trying to use that narrow majority to undo the
results of the 2012 election. But guess what, Mr. Speaker? It isn't
going to happen. They don't have the votes. The numbers do not add up.
The Affordable Care Act is the law of the land. It's been in effect for
2 years, and it's going to stay that way. If Republicans don't like it,
they can make their case to the American people in 2014.
But instead of facing that reality like thoughtful, serious grownups,
the Republican majority continues to throw temper tantrum after temper
tantrum, threatening to shut the government down, default on the
Nation's bills, and throw the economy into a tailspin. It's absurd.
Unfortunately, it's hurting real people. A Republican shutdown of
government would actually cost us more money, Mr. Speaker.
The Senate has already acted. They passed a clean continuing
resolution that keeps the government funded through November 15. Now I
don't particularly like that bill because it keeps in place the
Republicans' beloved sequester, which is not only unreasonable but it
is doing real harm to our economy. But apparently that's not good
enough for the extremists in the Republican Conference. They would
rather drive this economy off a cliff than make a reasonable
compromise.
[[Page H5978]]
Instead, they have unveiled a bill that includes two major changes to
the Affordable Care Act, including a 1-year delay in the implementation
of that law. Senator Reid has made it clear that the Senate will not
consider any of these changes, and it's clear the Republicans simply
want to shut this government down.
So that's where we are, Mr. Speaker.
In closing, I would just urge my Republican friends, Please don't do
this. I have to believe that there are enough grownups on the other
side of the aisle who are willing to stand up and say, Enough is
enough. In the meantime, we should reject this rule, reject the
underlying bill, and get back to work.
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings), my distinguished colleague on
the Rules Committee.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Thank you very much, Ms. Slaughter, for
yielding the time.
Mr. Speaker, in the face of the President saying that he will veto
any measure that seeks to defund ObamaCare and in the face of the
Senate Majority Leader saying that he will accept nothing in the Senate
other than a clean continuing resolution, I can't believe that my
colleagues on the other side really believe that they are going to
prevail and cause the President, with his signature legislation, to
change his mind or that of the Senate Majority Leader.
The Senate doesn't come back in until Monday at 2 o'clock, and that
means the clock will run out. You say on the other side that you don't
want to shut the government down, and yet exactly what you are doing
here this evening will do exactly that. It will shut the government
down.
Now there's a certain amount of absurdity that carries throughout our
history. I would commend to my colleagues on the other side that they
read Jon Meacham's book, ``Thomas Jefferson: The Art of Power.'' At a
point in the course of that book, Jefferson becomes the President. And
when he becomes the President, in his inaugural address he commented
about the majority needing to protect the minority. He said, If you do
not do that--this is in his inaugural address--you become an oppressor.
That's exactly what's happening. You have one wing of your party, a
rump group, that are strong and united. They're entitled to that
particular undertaking, but all they're doing, when all is said and
done, is hurting America. They're not helping anyone but themselves.
The simple fact of the matter is that in your majority you let a mob
of 40 people--probably as many as 60--determine what democracy is going
to look like for insurance for the rest of America. I call that
mobocracy, not democracy.
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my
time.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Colorado (Mr. Polis), a most distinguished colleague on the Rules
Committee.
Mr. POLIS. Mr. Speaker, what on Earth are we doing here? This is the
wealthiest, most free, greatest Nation on the face of the Earth, and
we're seriously debating a Republican proposal to close down our
Federal Government? Why are we doing this to ourselves?
I understand that a majority of the people in this body, the House of
Representatives, controlled by Republicans, don't like the Affordable
Care Act. I understand that. It's been very clear. They've voted on
repealing it 43 times. That's very, very clear.
However, we have a system of government established in our
Constitution. We have a separation of powers. The Supreme Court has
ruled on the Affordable Care Act. We have a Senate that does not want
to repeal the Affordable Care Act, and we have a President that doesn't
want to repeal the Affordable Care Act. That's clear. It was not
repealed. This House can pass it as many times as we want. It still
isn't repealed.
So when this House doesn't get its way, it wants to shut down the
entire Federal Government just because they couldn't get the President,
who was elected by the people of this country, or the Senate that was
elected by the people in the 50 States of this country, to go along
with what this body wants? That's arrogant. That's harmful to the
American people. That threatens to destroy wealth and value creation
and jobs in our country.
Whether it's pharmaceutical companies who rely on the FDA moving
drugs through the approval process, whether it's our troops overseas,
whether it's our patent offices, the private sector and the job
creation engine of this country relies on the rules that we set in the
marketplace. That's what the capitalist system is founded upon.
The Republican Party, by shutting down the government just because
everybody won't go along with what they want, is threatening to destroy
wealth and value creation in this country, destroy jobs, and
threatening our place as a global leader.
I strongly encourage my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this Republican
proposal to shut down the government and let's move forward and pass
the continuing resolution here in the House, by Monday, send it to
President Obama, and let's keep this country moving forward.
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, for every opportunity that Republicans have to talk
about how bad this bill is, there is an equal opportunity for our
colleagues to talk about how great it is. But the facts of the case are
the American people don't see it yet. The reason why we don't see it is
because this President and this administration have given out over
1,200 waivers to people, saying, It's okay for you to not have to come
under this law; what you do is okay. But it's not okay for the American
people, individuals of this Nation, the men and women who get up and go
to work every day.
And let's note, too, that we have a section of this bill that's about
paying the military in case we do shut down. I would think that our
colleagues on the other side of this building would want to make sure
that we pay members of our military. They're important to this country.
This body is going to do it.
Mr. Speaker, at this time I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from
Georgia (Mr. Woodall), a distinguished young gentleman of the Rules
Committee.
Mr. WOODALL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for yielding me the time and
thank you for your leadership on the Rules Committee because when I
signed up for Rules Committee, I knew I was going to get a lesson in
rhetoric up there. I look at some of my colleagues from the Rules
Committee on the other side. We have some long days and some long
nights up there. But 9 times out of 10, it's about things that matter.
It's about substance. And that's what it's about today.
To talk about a Republican bill to shut down the government is
obviously nonsense, Mr. Speaker. I know there's not a point of order
here against nonsense on the House floor. If there was, I would have
brought it up. Because that's nonsense.
This is a bill to keep the government open. It uses the exact same
funding level that the Senate just sent back to us. I've got a lot of
colleagues on my side of the aisle who would like for that funding
level to be lower. I promise you, if we could get the group together
who wanted to lower that funding level, we could do that here, too. But
we didn't. This is a bill that brings exactly the same funding level
that the Senate sent over to us.
What else does this bill do? This bill empowers the government to
continue to pay our men and women in uniform if, by some outside
chance, our colleagues in the Senate abdicate responsibility and can't
pass a bill. I think we all agree on that. I don't think there's a man
or woman in this Chamber that thinks military families ought to have to
worry because we can't come together on a bill.
{time} 2015
We are going to come together. But that worry is in their hearts and
their minds today. We have an opportunity to take it away, and we
should.
In terms of bringing people together, Mr. Speaker, you know,
something else that's in this bill is the repeal of the medical device
tax. We talk about jobs bills here on the floor of the House regularly.
If you have a medical device
[[Page H5979]]
manufacturer in your district, let them talk to you about the impact
this tax is having on their business. It is killing jobs. It is
destroying American leadership in this area.
This is not a divisive issue. We agree on this issue here. Our
friends in the Senate, Mr. Speaker, voted 79-20 in favor of this very
same issue.
I understand folks are worn out, Mr. Speaker. It's been a long
weekend. It's been a long couple of weeks. But the American people
deserve to know the truth of what's going on here on the floor tonight.
The truth is the passage of this rule and this underlying legislation
keeps the doors of the government open; repeals the job-killing medical
device tax that both the House and Senate have said they wanted to
repeal; protects changes of the Affordable Care Act that American
families have come to depend on, like keeping children on their
policies; but eliminates all of the uncertainty of all of the broken
portions of the Affordable Care Act, all of the broken portions of
ObamaCare, all of the portions that have already seen 1,200 waivers--
and waivers again just yesterday. It doesn't ask to repeal it, Mr.
Speaker. It asks to delay it for 1 year so all the uncertainty that's
happened can be explored.
Every Member in this Chamber has someone in his district who has lost
their insurance policy, Mr. Speaker. Everyone in this Chamber has a
person in their district who heard from the President of the United
States: If you like your insurance policy, you can keep it. And every
single one of you know, Mr. Speaker, that someone in your district has
had that promise broken for them.
Let's keep what's working. Let's stop what's broken. Let's come
together. Let's get this passed. We owe it to the American people.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the
gentlelady from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur).
Ms. KAPTUR. I thank Ranking Member Slaughter for yielding me the
time.
It is clear that the Republican majority is here tonight to begin the
process of shutting down the Government of the United States. How
irresponsible; how counterproductive; and what a politically
manufactured crisis.
The uncertainty this behavior engenders across our Nation, the fits
and starts, on-again-off-again approach the majority is employing is
not in the interest of economic growth and job creation, nor America's
standing globally.
Speaker Boehner said he would not bring a bill to the floor that
hasn't been posted online for at least 72 hours. Well, it's obvious he
and the House Republicans won't keep their promise. In fact, this is
the 34th time that legislation has been brought to the floor with less
than 72 hours to read it. So we find ourselves on the brink of a
government-wide shutdown, driven by a minority of the majority of just
one House of Congress.
Simply put: the Republicans want to shut down the Federal Government
because they're mad about the results of the 2012 elections.
Republicans are mad that the Supreme Court held that the Affordable
Care Act was constitutional. Threatening a government shutdown because
you don't get your way is not how we should be going about conducting
the people's business.
According to a CBS News poll, 80 percent of Americans say threatening
a government shutdown during budget debate is not an acceptable way to
negotiate.
Our entire country will be affected by what is happening here.
Moody's Analytics estimates that a shutdown of 3 to 4 weeks would cut
economic growth in half.
Why do this when our economy is recovering? Housing loans won't be
made, small business loans; our national parks will be closed;
lifesaving research won't be conducted. Why do this? Why put the
country through all this?
Previous government shutdowns and manufactured crises have had severe
consequences. During the first 1995 shutdown, 800,000 workers were
furloughed. And during the debt ceiling fight in 2011, the Dow Jones
industrial average tumbled 1,700 points, or nearly 14 percent.
Let's stop the antics and govern, not shut down the Government of the
United States.
I ask my colleagues to vote against this measure and support economic
growth not manufactured crises.
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, you know, one of the most commonsense
classes that we've ever had of new Members of Congress has arrived in
Washington. They're in their first year, and they're seeing some
amazing things that are happening.
I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr.
Pittenger), one of these new freshman gentlemen.
Mr. PITTENGER. Let's talk about responsibility tonight, Mr. Speaker.
You know, we've gotten notices from our constituents for the last
many weeks that their premiums now, they're getting their notices,
they're going up. I had one doctor who wrote me with his family that's
gone up 200 percent--$11,000 deductible; yet he has to pay $1,100 a
month. Another friend called me, his premium is 250 percent more.
So let's talk about responsibility. Let's talk about what made
America great in terms of health care.
People come from all over the world to our shores for great health
care. Do you know why, Mr. Speaker? Innovation. America has the
greatest health care in the world; yet innovation now is going to be
curtailed. The great research hospitals of this country now are having
to cut back because they don't see that opportunity.
We have changed the whole direction through centralized planning,
through a great bureaucracy running health care that's going to cut
into innovation. It's not going to make us the country we were.
You know, there was a time when we used to have to pay about $9,000
for laser surgery, and today it's about $1,500. That's because of
innovation; it's because of competition. We're going to lose
competition in the market today, Mr. Speaker. That doesn't make sense.
I would like to say a bit about this investment tax, 3.8 percent. I
wonder how many people in the country right now are just waking up to
the fact that when they go sell their home, they're going to pay
another 3.8 percent tax. All that was written in that 2,000-page
document has finally come to light, and that's why people are so
concerned.
We have got to change this, Mr. Speaker. That's why I want to
advocate that we defer this for a whole year. Let the truth come out,
and then let's make a wise decision for the American people.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, many of us promised our constituents
that we would come back here to Washington and fight for them. I
imagine that there are some families in America right now holding an 8-
year-old or a 10-year-old, maybe a teenager, with a preexisting
disease. Maybe like the little girl that I heard about when we were
debating the Affordable Care Act that had leukemia, and time after time
after time she was rejected by insurance companies until she died.
And so I asked the question earlier tonight: What is the morally
right thing to do? And I want to announce what is going to happen
tonight.
Let us be very clear. Let us not be full of smoke and mirrors.
Tonight, the Republican majority will vote to shut the government down.
I'll say it again: they will vote to shut the government down. They
will look that family in the eye, and they will say that they are
delaying the Affordable Care Act--long approved. But they are actually
destroying it and eliminating it. A delay is eliminating it.
They will stop the American people on October 1 from getting premiums
between $100 and $130. They will stop seniors from being able to have
help with their prescription part D, their prescription drugs, choosing
dog food over their prescription. They will stop preventative care.
They will stop research for cancer and leukemia and heart disease and
stroke. They will stop the preventative care nonpayments. And they will
also stop those young families from being able to have insurance.
Remember what I said: What is the morally right thing to do? Is it
morally right to be able to provide for the American people health care
that they've never had? Is it the morally right thing to shut down the
government so that seniors trying to get
[[Page H5980]]
Medicare benefits will not have anybody to process them, or Social
Security, or the disabled, or downpayment for homes for young families?
I came here to stand for the American people. Tonight you will
witness the shutdown of the government. That is what the vote will be,
a shutdown of this government.
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, you know, I would have to beg to differ
with the gentlewoman. That's not what this bill is about. Evidently,
the gentlewoman has not had time to read the bill. We are not debating
shutting down the House. We are debating what is called a continuing
resolution, Mr. Speaker. So I would encourage her to please go, and we
will help her at the Rules Committee and make sure she understands what
the bill is about.
Mr. Speaker, at this time, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
North Carolina (Mr. Meadows), a distinguished young man.
Mr. MEADOWS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to hopefully address some of
the things that were just mentioned.
We talk about a moral obligation. Truly, it is troubling to me to
hear so much talk in terms of a moral obligation when my State, the
State of North Carolina, is about to see the largest increase in
insurance premiums because of the Affordable Care Act in the country.
When we talk about 27-year-olds that can purchase insurance today, Mr.
Speaker, for $35 a month, and it goes to over $180 a month, what is
morally right about that, I ask you, Mr. Speaker?
You know, we've talked a whole lot in this Chamber about the fact
that there was a vote taken, that a President was elected. Indeed, we
did elect a President a mere 9 months ago. But I want to remind you,
Mr. Speaker, that I was also elected some 9 months ago. And we did not
elect a dictator; we elected a President. We did not have a vote that
did not elect Representatives. It is time that the
Representatives start representing the people that they were elected to
uphold and protect.
You know, we've heard a lot in this Chamber this evening about the
government--the government this, the government that. When do we start
focusing on the people? Because it is the people who are losing jobs.
It's the people who can't keep their insurance. It's the people whose
insurance premiums are going up. It's the people who are losing their
jobs and being cut back on hours to get part-time.
It is time that we stop acting like loyal subjects and start acting
like the Representatives that we were voted into office to uphold and
represent the people of this great country.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler).
Mr. NADLER. I thank the gentlelady for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, we are debating a continuing resolution, a budget. A
budget deals with amounts that we appropriate. This budget represents
great compromise--$250 billion less than the President first proposed.
But we are told we cannot pass this continuing resolution, we cannot
keep the government open unless we repeal or delay the Affordable Care
Act, an act which was fought over in the last Presidential election,
which was passed by both Houses of Congress, signed by the President.
The President campaigned for reelection saying he would implement it;
the Republicans said don't. The President and the Democratic Senate
were reelected.
We think the Affordable Care Act will help more Americans get
affordable health insurance. Republicans don't agree. So they should
campaign on it in the next election. If they can get the votes, elect
enough Senators, et cetera, repeal it. But that's not what they're
doing. They are blackmailing the country. They are saying they will
shut down the government, or worse--they will destroy the full faith
and credit of the United States in a few weeks if we don't repeal or
delay ObamaCare.
This is antidemocratic. It's like a 1930s gangster film--that's a
nice government you got there, that's a nice economy you got there;
pity if it should happen to blow up if you don't pay us off by giving
us what we want.
What if the Democratic majority in the Senate said: we won't approve
a continuing resolution; we will shut down the government unless both
Houses pass a strong gun control bill, or an immigration bill with a
fast track to citizenship? The Republicans would be greatly outraged,
would be rightly outraged at that blackmail. But that's what they are
doing here today. The minority is blackmailing the majority of the
country.
This is subversive to democratic government. Government by blackmail
cannot be allowed to destroy the American form of government, which is
what this attempt represents. If we give into this, then the minority
can rule against the majority. If you want to repeal the Affordable
Care Act, elect a President, elect a majority in both Houses, and go do
it. But we must not give into this threat to democratic government and
transform it into a different type of government. That's why we must
pass the continuing resolution without these subversive amendments.
{time} 2030
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, at this time, I yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from Bucks County, Pennsylvania, Congressman Fitzpatrick.
Mr. FITZPATRICK. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for his leadership
on this continuing resolution, which, if adopted, will guarantee that
the government continues to operate.
I rise this evening in support of the rule and the repeal of the
medical device tax, which is one of 20 unnecessary taxes used to fund
the President's misguided health care law.
Southeastern Pennsylvania, and in particular the Eighth Congressional
District, is home to exceptional medical device manufacturers and
innovative health care companies that are truly making a difference.
This unique and essential form of manufacturing is an area in which
America excels.
Simply put, the medical device tax is a punitive gross receipts tax.
It hurts American businesses by eroding their competitive advantage to
innovate in the United States. It hurts high-skilled workers whose
companies are putting the future of their industry at risk. It
discourages innovators from choosing health care as a pursuit. It
drives up the cost of health care for Americans.
Dave Holcombe of Souderton, Pennsylvania, wrote to me:
Nationwide, our industry directly employees over 400,000
people and supports nearly 2 million related jobs. The
recently implemented tax on medical devices will likely
result in the loss of as many as 43,000 of these high-paying,
high-skilled American jobs, reducing American competitiveness
and innovation and preventing patients from receiving the
lifesaving medical devices and care that they need.
Tom Molz, the president and CEO of the Stout Medical Group in my
district wrote:
This tax will force medical device companies to go to other
countries, resulting in the loss of jobs and the loss of all
other taxes generated by those jobs. The medical device
industry is one of the few industries with a strong
manufacturing base. It would be very disappointing to lose
this base and the jobs associated with this industry.
And, finally, Jeffrey Lawler of Kintnersville, Bucks County,
Pennsylvania, explained:
Medical technology is one of the only American
manufacturing sectors that is a net exporter, exporting $5.4
billion more than it imports. It also accounts for 40 percent
of the global technology market. But the U.S.'s lead has
shrunk dramatically in the last decade, and this tax serves
as a detrimental blow, helping to further shorten the gap.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional minute to the
gentleman from Pennsylvania.
Mr. FITZPATRICK. Mr. Speaker, these are real jobs, these are real
concerns, and this tax has real consequences.
The repeal of the tax is a strong way to support American businesses,
protect American workers, and ensure Americans have affordable access
to world-class health care. This is an issue that has wide bipartisan
support, as we heard earlier. Seventy-nine United States Senators have
already expressed support for repeal of this tax. This should be sent
to the United States Senate.
I urge support of the rule and passage of the bill.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
New Jersey (Mr. Pallone).
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, the Republicans aren't kidding anyone
tonight. They have the ability this
[[Page H5981]]
evening to take up the continuing resolution that was passed in the
Senate. If they passed it here tonight, it would go to the President,
we would have a budget, the President would sign it, and the government
would not shut down.
The government is going to shut down because they refuse to do that.
They are the ones that are shutting the government down because they
want to debate again the Affordable Care Act.
Now, this is the 45th time. I've come to the floor almost every time
on these votes to try to repeal the Affordable Care Act. It is a farce.
What is the debate? We had an election last November. The President
campaigned on the Affordable Care Act. His Republican opponent said he
would repeal it. The President won.
Now I hear my colleague from Texas come here and say: oh, I've got a
poll that says that people don't like the Affordable Care Act. Well, I
can come up with any poll you want. I can bring you a poll down here
that shows people like it or don't. Then he says: well, I've got all my
constituents, they don't like it, and they're suffering this way, that.
I can bring all my constituents that are waiting for October 1 so they
can sign up because they don't have health insurance.
Why are we debating this tonight? We should not be debating the
Affordable Care Act for the 45th time. It is the obligation of those
who are in the majority to govern, not to shut the government down.
That is what they want to do--shut the government down.
Then he goes on to say: oh, that's okay, we are going to pay the
military. Well, I'm glad that we are going to pay the military, but
what about all the other functions that are involved with the armed
services? What about the support services? What about everything else
that goes on with the military? That's all going to shut down. So don't
give me this argument about how we are going to pay the military.
The bottom line is he knows, and they all know on the Republican side
of the aisle, that by taking this vote tonight they are forcing or they
are getting closer and closer to a shutdown that they are responsible
for because they refuse to accept the reality that the Affordable Care
Act is law.
I am not going to debate the Affordable Care Act anymore tonight. I
know it's a good law; I know my constituents want it. But that's not
the issue. The issue is that you are going to risk the full faith and
credit of this government. That's what the issue is.
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the
gentlelady from Florida (Ms. Castor).
Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, when the American Government
shuts down early next week, it will be plain that the Republicans in
Congress are responsible. Unfortunately, it will be our neighbors back
home and small businesses back home that will have to deal with the
consequences.
When the Tea Party Republicans pushed the country towards default
previously, they caused real economic damage. America's credit rating
was downgraded, and their previous government shutdown cost American
taxpayers over $2 billion. Now they're back for more, and they appear
quite willing to cause significant economic damage again.
There is more to this story. Over the past few months, while our
neighbors back home have been working hard at their jobs, getting their
kids back into school, the story here in Congress has been one of
dysfunction rooted in the House Republicans' inability and refusal to
negotiate an overall budget for the United States with the U.S. Senate.
They passed a make-believe budget proposal that was so unrealistic they
could not bring themselves to come to a budget conference with the
Senate.
So, without a budget, House Republicans left the country in limbo,
and they embraced the severe and mindless sequester cuts as their
spending strategy.
In contrast, Democrats have offered a balanced plan authored by
Congressman Chris Van Hollen from Maryland, but now we are here in the
eleventh hour. The Tea Party Republicans are holding the American
economy hostage, and they have charted a course for job losses and real
pain. The Republicans are very poor fiscal stewards for American
families and businesses. They are reckless and irresponsible.
I urge all my colleagues to vote ``no'' on their government shutdown
plan.
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my
time.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Deutch).
Mr. DEUTCH. I thank the gentlelady.
Mr. Speaker, I have been sitting here listening to the chairman talk
about the disastrous effects of ObamaCare--destruction, devastation,
chaos.
I want to read some Facebook messages that I received from members of
the south Florida community this week.
One man wrote:
Years ago, I finally scraped together enough money to buy
health insurance for my family and purchased it. Months
later, my wife had irregular bleeding, and we went to see her
doctor. He did a pap test, and it came back normal. The
bleeding stopped and life went on.
Not long after, she began to bleed. Another pap test was
done. Later the problem was finally diagnosed as cervical
cancer.
After that, I was contacted by my insurance company and
told it was a preexisting condition. They dropped us,
returned my premiums, and paid nothing.
I was pauperized trying to pay and keep up with the surgeon
for follow-up on my wife.
It took years and a willingness to walk away from that debt
to recover. The very talented surgeon that saved my wife's
life got mostly stiffed, and the taxpayers picked up the
hospital tab.
We need ObamaCare.
Or how about this message from a woman in Broward County:
I was never able to be insured except through a group plan
at work. When I stopped working due to my health, it was
impossible to obtain a policy. I had tried different
companies, but was rejected each time due to my congenital
heart defect.
I went uninsured for about 3 years. Once the Affordable
Care Act's preexisting condition plan started, I finally got
coverage through the preexisting insurance pool.
Unfortunately, I just learned that I need my fifth open-
heart surgery again and know ObamaCare will cover me, whereas
no other private insurer will. I am willing to explain the
struggles of individuals like myself who were born with
pediatric problems, but have grown into aging adults who are
not poor enough for Medicaid or old enough for Medicare and
are always denied private individual insurance.
To deny care for those of us who were born with a medical
issue that we did not choose to have, it is reckless to
exempt us from being insured.
Mr. Speaker, what is reckless and destructive and devastating and
chaotic is the Republican majority's decision to drive this government
to close. There has been enough delay. Too many Americans have been
waiting far too long for access to affordable health care.
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I will remind my friends that we hear stories after stories about
companies dropping their employees from their employee-sponsored health
care plans because of the costs and the way the health care bill is
written.
I think it is very interesting how--I have great sympathy for
individuals who are having problems. They are in the district that I
represent from Dallas also--the vast majority of people who are going
to be just like them, huge amounts of people, are now being impacted by
ObamaCare.
It goes back to an argument that we made years and years ago moving
forward: don't impact the people that have health care and insurance;
help the people that don't have that. This is a case that is happening
all across this country.
The problem is the President played a Robin Hood plan. He went after
everybody that has got insurance, he went after everybody that had a
job, he went after employers. Rather than us taking care of those that
did not--and let's say there were going to be 23 million people that
were going to be covered, and I believe that that was the number years
ago--23 million people times about $5,000 a contribution so that they
could get an insurance plan would be far less destructive on our
economy than going after 230 million people and destroying their health
care plans.
This comes back to a simple ideology, Mr. Speaker. They want a
government-run health care system. That is what they are after--a
government-
[[Page H5982]]
run health care system, just like they want in other areas of the free
economy. That's why they've done so many outward things with not only
student loans to the banking industry, health care industry, the energy
industry; they have an attack and an assault on employers and the
American people.
I have great respect for these individuals that we're talking about.
I share their concern and I guarantee you I and my office will help
these people and have been helping these people, and we care about
them.
But that's not what we fixed. We did a Robin Hood plan to take from
everybody else and put everybody in trouble then, including the
economy, including jobs, and we are now a part-time American economy.
By the way they wrote the bill, it is not only expensive but it kills
jobs. It is just as effective as what their EPA war on coal is. It is
an attack and assault on the free enterprise system and free people.
To say that the Republican Party doesn't care about these individuals
is simply not true. We would offer a plan, a different way to look at
it, and take the 230 million Americans that had something and worry
about the others. That is what we have been trying to do all 17 years
I've been in Congress.
The biggest divide in this country is on taxes, and it's on health
care. Republicans want normal, regular people to be able to have health
care. That is what we believe in. That's the difference and the real
story behind tonight.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Scott).
Mr. DAVID SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I hope all of America is
listening tonight because we are seeing one of the darkest moments in
the history of this Congress for what we are about.
{time} 2045
The Republican Party is held hostage by a Senator 8 months here to
undermine the democratic process. Here we are, and they will shut down
the government of the United States because we will not enforce the
law.
Affordable Care is the law.
Everything the distinguished gentleman from Texas just said he said
during debate. We're not debating. It's the law. It's the law of the
land. It has been upheld by the Supreme Court. It has been debated in
the elections. President Obama ran on it. Romney said, if he got
elected, he'd throw it away. The President said, if he got elected, he
would make it work.
And the people spoke.
Make no mistake about it, my friends, the Republicans. The American
people are never going to forget that it was you who shut down the
government of the people.
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, it is not I. It will not be I. I am here
to help, and the legislation that's on the floor is about a continuing
resolution.
At this time, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Houston, Texas,
Congressman Culberson.
Mr. CULBERSON. Mr. Speaker, the Democrat side of the aisle can say it
until they're blue in the face that the sky is green. That doesn't make
it green. It is not true.
This legislation is designed to keep the government open by fully
funding it at levels that the Senate has already agreed to.
I think it's also good to get a few other things straight around here
and point out that Social Security checks, even in the unlikeliest
event the government were to close down, will continue to flow because
employees of all mandatory programs administered by the government are
considered to be essential. Social Security checks are obviously
essential. Those employees are essential. Social Security will continue
to flow.
My colleague from Texas said that children would be thrown off of
their parents' insurance policies. That law took effect last year. It's
not affected by what's before the House today. My colleague also said
children or people with preexisting conditions could be denied
coverage. That is also incorrect, because that law took effect last
year.
The bill before the House today fully funds the government. We are
even separately funding the military, and we are going to give a stark
choice to the President of the United States and the Senate: Do you
want to shut down the government or do you want to force on the
American people a 2,500-page bill that was forced through here so fast
that Speaker Pelosi said that we have to pass the bill to find out
what's in it?
One of my colleagues from North Carolina just pointed out that many
Americans are waking up today to discover there is a 3.8 percent tax on
the sales of their homes. How many other surprises do we have in this
2,500-page bill?
All Republicans are asking tonight is to give the Nation a year to
study a 2,500-page bill that even Speaker Pelosi didn't have a clue as
to what was in it. We as a Nation deserve to read and understand one of
the most important pieces of legislation passed in the history of
Congress--which will socialize the greatest health care system ever
created. We are in the House tonight, fulfilling our responsibility as
adults to fund the government, to fund the military--and by the way,
the Senate has had the Defense Department appropriations bill for over
90 days and the Military Construction and VA for 90 days each.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
New York (Mr. Engel).
Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, by refusing to advance a resolution that can
pass the Senate, the Republican majority has made the reckless and
irresponsible choice to shut down the Federal Government.
The Affordable Care Act is the law of the land. It was passed by a
majority in this House and the Senate. It was signed into law by the
President, and it has been upheld by the Supreme Court. To try to
repeal the Affordable Care Act at a time when we are talking about
funding the government is like mixing apples with oranges. I've heard
so many horror stories about the Affordable Care Act, all of which are
irresponsible. Let me say some facts about it.
In my State of New York, people who enroll in the highest tiered
plans our health insurance exchange will offer can expect to see a 53
percent reduction compared to this year's individual rates. The average
approved rates for the individual silver plan in New York are 10
percent lower than previously forecasted by the CBO. These reductions
don't even take into account the subsidies that will be available for
many New Yorkers who are purchasing coverage on the exchange, which
will lead to even lower costs.
It is time for Republicans to accept reality and to allow this law to
start helping the American people. The government should not be shut
down. This is a very, very dangerous course. Would you rather see small
business owners struggle as the SBA will be unable to review loan
applications or loan guarantees? Republicans should not shut the
government down.
Mr. SESSIONS. I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the
gentlewoman from Maryland (Ms. Edwards).
Ms. EDWARDS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this rule and to
the underlying amendments.
I want to be very clear. I don't even have a voice, but I want to let
America know that House Republicans are shutting down the government.
They are doing it intentionally. They are doing it on purpose.
Mr. Speaker, 1.4 million Active Duty personnel won't get their
paychecks. About half of the Federal civilian employees won't get paid.
Those who do show up at work won't be paid. House Republicans are
shutting down the government. Even as we mourn the tragedy at the Navy
Yard here in Washington, Active Duty military would be guaranteed to
receive their pay, but their civilian counterparts, who risk their
lives in service to the mission, would not. House Republicans are
shutting down the government. We are losing waves of Federal employees
in furloughs. We are undermining their benefits and freezing their
salaries.
I urge my colleagues to reject this.
Tonight, I want it to be known that the Senate won't take it up. The
President won't sign it. House Republicans are shutting down the
government.
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my
time.
[[Page H5983]]
To advise the gentlewoman, I am through with my speakers, and I will
then, as she finishes, offer a close.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Texas has 2\1/2\ minutes
remaining. The gentlewoman from New York has 1\1/2\ minutes remaining.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. I understand that the gentleman is prepared to close.
With that, Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Welch).
Mr. WELCH. Mr. Speaker, what you are proposing in this legislation--
basically shutting down the government and stiffing our creditors--is
really stupid, and here is why.
We have got to move on. We have had a debate about health care. Some
of us are strongly in favor of this legislation, and some of us are
strongly opposed to it. That's a legitimate policy debate, but the
folks for it won in Congress; they won in the Supreme Court; and they
won in the last Presidential election. At a certain point--I've been on
the losing side, by the way--it's time to say, Sober up. Move on. Get
on with the program. Focus on what are the implementation challenges,
and work on them together.
But the notion that we would actually suggest that it's possible for
us to consider stiffing our creditors in shutting down the government
and inflicting pain on innocent people--that's bizarre. It has no place
in this debate. Sometimes we win debates and sometimes we lose, but
either side, we've got to move on.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, in closing, I want to urge my colleagues
to vote ``no'' on this rule and ``no'' on this bill because--no
question about it--a ``yes'' vote on either one of them is a vote for
the shutdown in the House. The Senate will not take this up--we are
absolutely certain of it--and we are on the road to a shutdown. The
Republican Party insists on doing that. Do not help them. Vote ``no.''
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. SESSIONS. I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to just go through the things that we've
talked about that are the attributes of why we are here tonight.
The cost to taxpayers: $716 billion was cut from senior care,
Medicare, to fund ObamaCare. That harms our seniors.
Just one example of the cost to employers: Delta Air Lines announced
that ObamaCare will cost its company $100 million in increased health
care costs over the next year.
Americans are losing their current health care coverage. We read
about it, and we know that UPS, Walgreens, and many other employers are
losing their health care coverage that they have today.
Fewer hours and fewer full-time jobs. Since ObamaCare was passed,
there have been seven part-time jobs for every one full-time job that
was added.
Mr. Speaker, this is not a way to move our country forward. The
Republican Party is prepared. We believe and can substantiate that a
``yes'' vote is for making sure that we keep this government open--
something that the American people want and need. That's why the
Republican Party--233 strong--is here tonight. I urge my colleagues to
vote ``yes'' on the rule and ``yes'' on the underlying legislation.
I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question
on the resolution.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to the rule
and the underlying resolution.
I oppose this rule because it conditions the funding needed to avoid
a government shutdown on a one-year delay in the implementation of the
Affordable Care Act and a repeal of the excise tax on certain medical
device that helps defray the cost of the affordable, quality healthcare
made available for the first time to millions of Americans by the
Affordable Care Act (ACA).
I oppose this rule because the two amendments it makes in order to
the ``clean'' continuing resolution passed yesterday by the Senate
will, if approved, result in a shutdown of the government.
Both President Obama and Senate Majority Leader Reid have it crystal
clear that they will not accept any continuing resolution containing
any provision to delay, defund, or weaken the Affordable Care Act.
The Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare, was passed by both houses of
Congress and signed into law by the President three years ago. It has
been upheld by the Supreme Court. It is here to stay.
Mr. Speaker, you would think our friends across the aisle would have
gotten this message by now because they have tried to repeal or
undermine the Affordable Care Act more than 40 times without success.
As former President Clinton would say: ``Here's another Obamacare
score for you: `Obamacare--42, House Republicans--zero'.''
Since it is clear that anti-Obamacare amendments made in order by
this rule are not going to become law, the only purpose to be served by
this latest kamikaze mission by our friends across the aisle is to shut
down the government and harm the economic recovery and disrupt the
lives of millions of Americans who provide and depend upon the services
provide by the federal government.
Mr. Speaker, it is well and good that House majority has finally
realized the importance of ensuring that our troops are paid so they
can provide for their families.
However, this piecemeal approach of singling out worthy beneficiaries
on an ad hoc basis is inadequate as it denies many other critical
services that Americans depend so heavily on.
That is why it is grossly irresponsible for House Republicans to be
wasting time on a resolution like the one before us that will lead to a
government shutdown.
Mr. Speaker, we need to pass the clean CR approved by the Senate so
we can keep our promises to our veterans, as well as the doctors,
nurses, and hospital workers who take care of our wounded and healthy
warriors.
We need to pass the clean CR approved by the Senate so we can fund
our engineers and technicians who maintain all of our critical military
equipment to keep our troops safe and take care of national security
infrastructure.
We need to pass the clean CR approved by the Senate so we can fund
our IT security folks who protect us from cyber-attacks, and our
astronauts who risk their lives to push the technical boundaries of
knowledge for all mankind.
These exceptional Americans, and the people who depend on them and
benefit from their work, do not deserve to be locked out of their
workplaces on Tuesday.
These exceptional Americans deserve a Congress that does its job and
keeps America open for business.
Mr. Speaker, make no mistake about it, given the lateness of the hour
and the irresponsibility of the House majority in wasting time trying
to defund or impede the implementation of the Affordable Care Act, any
vote other than one to concur in the clean continuing resolution passed
yesterday by the Senate is a vote to shut down the government.
For these reasons and more, I oppose this rule and the underlying
amendments it makes in order and urge my colleagues to join me in
urging the passage of H.J. Res. 59 as amended by the Senate so that
Americans can rest assured that their government will be open for
business and to serve them on Tuesday morning.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on ordering the previous
question.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 and clause 9 of rule
XX, this 15-minute vote on ordering the previous question will be
followed by 5-minute votes on adoption of the resolution, if ordered,
and the motion to suspend on H.R. 2251.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 229,
nays 192, not voting 10, as follows:
[Roll No. 494]
YEAS--229
Aderholt
Amash
Amodei
Bachmann
Bachus
Barletta
Barr
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
Diaz-Balart
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
Herrera Beutler
Holding
Hudson
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
[[Page H5984]]
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
LoBiondo
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Marchant
Marino
Massie
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
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
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)
Rokita
Rooney
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--192
Andrews
Barber
Barrow (GA)
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, 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
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
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lujan Grisham (NM)
Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
Lynch
Maffei
Maloney, Carolyn
Maloney, Sean
Matheson
Matsui
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McNerney
Meng
Michaud
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (FL)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Negrete McLeod
Nolan
O'Rourke
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Payne
Perlmutter
Peters (CA)
Peters (MI)
Peterson
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
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Yarmuth
NOT VOTING--10
Davis (CA)
Holt
McCarthy (NY)
Meeks
Pelosi
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Rush
Visclosky
Waxman
{time} 2118
Messrs. BRADY of Pennsylvania, PETERS of California, and CARSON of
Indiana changed their vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
Mr. GRAVES of Missouri changed his vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
So the previous question was ordered.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Rodney Davis of Illinois). The question
is on the resolution.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. This is a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 231,
nays 191, not voting 9, as follows:
[Roll No. 495]
YEAS--231
Aderholt
Amash
Amodei
Bachmann
Bachus
Barletta
Barr
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
Diaz-Balart
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
Herrera Beutler
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
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
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)
Rokita
Rooney
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
Barrow (GA)
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, 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
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
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lujan Grisham (NM)
Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
Lynch
Maffei
Maloney, Carolyn
Maloney, Sean
Matsui
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McNerney
Meng
Michaud
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (FL)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Negrete McLeod
Nolan
O'Rourke
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Payne
Perlmutter
Peters (CA)
Peters (MI)
Peterson
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
[[Page H5985]]
NOT VOTING--9
Davis (CA)
Holt
McCarthy (NY)
Meeks
Pelosi
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Rush
Visclosky
Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore
The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). There are 2 minutes
remaining.
{time} 2125
So the resolution was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________