[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 39 (Tuesday, March 7, 2017)]
[House]
[Pages H1547-H1550]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
FRED D. THOMPSON FEDERAL BUILDING AND UNITED STATES COURTHOUSE
Mr. BARLETTA. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the
bill (H.R. 375) to designate the Federal building and United States
courthouse located at 719 Church Street in Nashville, Tennessee, as the
``Fred D. Thompson Federal Building and United States Courthouse''.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 375
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.
The Federal building and United States courthouse located
at 719 Church Street in Nashville, Tennessee, shall be known
and designated as the ``Fred D. Thompson Federal Building and
United States Courthouse''.
SEC. 2. REFERENCES.
Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper,
or other record of the United States to the Federal building
and United States courthouse referred to in section 1 shall
be deemed to be a reference to the ``Fred D. Thompson Federal
Building and United States Courthouse''.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Pennsylvania (Mr. Barletta) and the gentleman from Georgia (Mr.
Johnson) each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania.
{time} 1715
General Leave
Mr. BARLETTA. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks
and include extraneous material on H.R. 375.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Pennsylvania?
There was no objection.
Mr. BARLETTA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, H.R. 375 would designate the Federal building and United
States courthouse located in Nashville, Tennessee, as the Fred D.
Thompson Federal Building and United States Courthouse.
I would like to thank the gentlewoman from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn)
for her leadership on this legislation.
Senator Thompson was respected for his work as a lawyer, an actor,
and as a United States Senator. This legislation is a fitting tribute
that I am honored to bring to the floor today.
Fred Thompson first made a name for himself as an assistant U.S.
attorney from 1969 to 1972. That experience brought him to the national
stage in his subsequent position as special counsel on a number of
Senate committees, most notably as minority counsel with the Senate
Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, better known as
the Watergate Committee.
It was then-Counsel Thompson who helped frame Senator Howard Baker's
now famous question, ``What did the President know, and when did he
know it?'' in regards to the Watergate controversy. Thompson himself
asked an even more important question related to the existence of taped
conversations in the Oval Office--tapes that led to President Nixon's
eventual resignation.
After returning to the private practice of law in Nashville, Thompson
represented the chairperson of the State Parole Board who unearthed a
cash-for-clemency scheme involving the then-Governor of Tennessee. This
case was eventually made into a book and into the film ``Marie.'' Fred
Thompson was cast to play himself, which launched his acting career.
Throughout the 1990s, Fred Thompson appeared in supporting roles in
some of the decade's biggest movies, including ``Days of Thunder,''
``The Hunt for Red October,'' and ``Die Hard 2.''
[[Page H1548]]
In 1994, Fred Thompson ran for political office for the first time
and was elected to fill the remaining 2 years of Vice President Al
Gore's Senate term. He was re-elected in 1996 to a full 6-year term and
served as chairman of the Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs
until his retirement in 2002.
That didn't slow Senator Thompson down. He returned to acting and won
the role of New York District Attorney Arthur Branch on the hit NBC
show ``Law & Order'' between 2002 and 2007. It was in 2007 that Senator
Thompson returned to politics by announcing his candidacy for the
United States Presidency. Although his return to the political realm
was unsuccessful, Senator Thompson's popularity did not wane. He
returned to acting on screen and on TV, wrote a memoir, and appeared
often to comment on politics. Tragically, in 2015, Senator Thompson
died from a recurrence of lymphoma.
Senator Thompson was a man of many talents. Through it all, he never
lost his roots as a Tennessean. Given Senator Thompson's dedication to
the law and public service, I believe it is more than fitting to name
this courthouse and Federal building in Nashville after him.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I
may consume.
I rise in support of this legislation, H.R. 375, which names the
Federal building and U.S. courthouse in Nashville, Tennessee, after the
late Senator Fred Thompson.
Senator Thompson had a long and extraordinary career in many roles
that included actor, lobbyist, private attorney, and radio show host.
But he is best known and respected not for his hawking of reverse
mortgages but for being an assistant U.S. attorney, a congressional
staffer, and, lastly, a U.S. Senator representing the State of
Tennessee. Senator Thompson was a graduate of Memphis State University
and Vanderbilt Law School. Senator Thompson got his start in public
life in 1967, when he served as an assistant U.S. attorney in
Nashville, Tennessee.
During his time in that office, he met U.S. Senator Howard Baker from
Tennessee who became a lifelong mentor to Senator Thompson. After
managing Senator Baker's successful U.S. Senate campaign in 1972,
Senator Thompson moved to Washington, D.C., where he was appointed
counsel to the U.S. Senate Committee investigating the Watergate break-
in and famously helped shape the direction and tone of those hearings.
I think that he will be known as one who helped Senator Baker in
formulating that age-old, timeless question: ``What did President Nixon
know, and when did he know it?'' It is ironic that today, Mr. Speaker,
people are asking about our current President, President Trump: What
did he know, and when did he know it?
I will tell you, President Trump stood right there at the rostrum of
the House last week and said that the Republican health insurance plan
would have insurance for everybody, the insurance would be far less
expensive and far better than what we have today. But we see now that
that was incorrect, as the Republicans have, on a Monday, I guess at
some point before the day ended, introduced their repeal bill of the
Affordable Care Act.
We are here talking about Senator Thompson today, but I just can't
help asking: When did President Trump know that the Republican plan was
going to throw 20 million people off of the Affordable Care Act
depriving them of insurance? When did he know that? What did he know
about this plan? Because not a whole lot of people around here knew of
the plan until it was released because it was shrouded in secrecy, and
it was released and a hearing scheduled to mark it up, to mark up the
legislation with no hearings taking place on the underlying
legislation.
So no CBO score, no congressional hearings about it, introducing it
in a cloud shrouded in secrecy, and, boom, it is dropped on the
American people at a time when you are trying to distract attention
from other questions about what President Trump knew about Russia,
Russian hacking, and those kinds of questions. What did he know about
the GSA hotel that the taxpayers own that he is leasing and now he is
the lessor and the lessee of that hotel that belongs to the American
people? What did he know and when did he know it? Those are questions
that the American people have. We intend to get down to the bottom of
it on this side. I hope that we will have some help on the other side.
I do want to say that I support this legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I think the American people would be horrified to learn
that of the 30 million people who were able to attain health insurance
coverage and access to the healthcare system as a result of passage of
the Affordable Care Act, many of those, a substantial number of those,
will be thrown off of the rolls and deprived of the ability to have
access to the healthcare system because of this new replacement bill
that has been filed, which, as I said before, has not been scored.
We don't know how much the Medicare solvency issue is going to cost.
We don't know how much it is going to cost. We don't know how much it
is going to cost the taxpayers. We don't know how many people will lose
their jobs because, after all, it stands to reason if you are serving
30 million more people, that means you have brought a whole lot of
people into the healthcare delivery business, people who are working,
people who have jobs, people who have husbands, wives, parents, and
children who are depending on them for support, and you are going to
tell them that their jobs are at risk.
Yes, they are, with this new law that has been half-baked introduced
and fast-tracked to become law without people really knowing about it.
This is something that people need to know about, people need to get
out and exclaim their opposition to because it is going to hurt a lot
of people.
The way that this bill changes the Affordable Care Act is it makes it
unaffordable for most Americans to be able to afford the insurance that
they have gained as a result of passage of the Affordable Care Act. The
premium subsidies are recalculated. Instead of based on a sliding scale
which is an indication of need, this Republican plan is going to
replace that and calculate the amount of the premium subsidy based on
age.
Now, what does that do, especially when you consider that some
elderly people are more well-heeled than others? They can afford
insurance, and they can afford to front the policy cost in return for
the tax subsidy that they get. But what does that do to the younger
people? So it is good news for some older people who are well-heeled.
They will be helped by this Republican plan. But the average wage
earner is going to be hurt--the younger people--because it is going to
be more expensive for them.
But then I have some bad news for the elderly people, also. Insurance
companies under this new plan will be able to charge the elderly five
times more than they will charge a younger person. That differential
had been abolished in the Affordable Care Act, but the Republicans are
bringing it back. Who is going to pay? It is going to be those same
elderly people. You put it in one hand, and you take it out of the
other. All of the elderly people in America, regardless of how much
money you earn, should be concerned about that.
Prioritizing health savings accounts over these premium subsidies is
going to provide a great big tax cut to the wealthy. You can't get away
from that. It is going to hurt the working people of this country. It
is going to be a tax giveaway to the wealthy. I am sad to hear and to
see this plan, and all of you should be, also.
Mr. Speaker, how much time do I have remaining?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman has 11 minutes remaining.
Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the
gentleman from New York (Mr. Espaillat).
Mr. ESPAILLAT. Mr. Speaker, I stand today in strong opposition to the
Republican proposal to repeal the Affordable Care Act.
This is a rushed bill, Mr. Speaker, that was written behind closed
doors in total secrecy with no daylight and with no access to the
important content of this bill that all of us should have ample time to
be able to digest the details of it and be able to make a good decision
that is consistent with the will of our constituents. This is a
[[Page H1549]]
rushed bill that was written behind closed doors, again, in total
secrecy.
Mr. Speaker, procedurally, we have not seen a CBO score of this bill.
There have been no hearings on this bill. There has been no expert
testimony on the impact of this bill, and the effect to healthcare
costs for families or the quality of coverage all of those families
will receive is completely unknown.
Substantively, this bill is an absolute nightmare. It guts Federal
requirements for essential health benefits like maternity care. It
shatters working Americans' access to insurance covering abortions. It
creates age-based subsidies, repeals all the ACA taxes, and completely
destroys the Medicaid expansion program which so much helped many of
our States.
{time} 1730
In our country, at least 11 million people will lose their healthcare
insurance coverage as a result of this reckless dismantlement of
Medicaid. In my district alone, over 156,000 individuals are going to
lose their coverage with the repeal of the Medicaid expansion. Over
156,000 people, Mr. Speaker, will lose their coverage.
This bill kicks the elderly, the poor, and the sick to the curb and
benefits only the young, healthy, and incredibly wealthy.
I urge my colleagues to stand with me in opposition. This bill is a
serious heart attack to the American people. It is a blatantly partisan
action to dismantle President Obama's successful signature project:
ObamaCare. Again, the 1 percent get their way.
Mr. Speaker, as we move forward, decades to come, we will be able to
go back and think of health care within the context of three major
programs: Medicaid, Medicare, and ObamaCare.
Mr. BARLETTA. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Brendan F. Boyle), my friend.
Mr. BRENDAN F. BOYLE of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I thank the
gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, with exactly zero hearings on the topic, our Republican
friends have now revealed their TrumpCare plan.
Just to remind everyone what President Trump said during the campaign
and promised, he said that his Republican plan would ``have insurance
for everybody,'' and that it would be ``far less expensive and far
better'' than what we have today.
Well, now we actually have the plan out. What does it do?
It kicks 20 million Americans off their health insurance. It sharply
increases out-of-pocket costs for millions of American families. It
rations care for millions of Americans on Medicaid. It includes massive
cuts to Medicaid. It would make maternity care much more expensive.
But don't worry, there is good news. If you are a CEO of a healthcare
company and you make, on average, as they do, somewhere between $13
million and $14 million, the tax increases that were leveled on you 6
years ago will now be repealed. So, congratulations. Those folks
benefit, but 20 million Americans lose their health insurance.
Please join me in saying ``no'' to TrumpCare.
Mr. BARLETTA. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I
may consume.
I just can't get out of my mind, Mr. Speaker, those words of
President Trump that everybody would have insurance and that it would
be far less expensive and far better than what we have today.
The Republicans have campaigned incessantly for the last 7 years on
repeal and replace of the Affordable Care Act, which they derisively
referred to as ObamaCare. We are going to repeal it and we are going to
replace it on day one is what they all said.
And here we are at day 45, something like that, and we have had
nothing but one scandal after another; but we have finally now gotten
to the House Republicans revealing what they have shrouded in secrecy
for so long over the last 7 years. It sputters out without much ado,
trying to sneak it in, trying to keep it undercover so that the
American people won't realize what is being done to them.
I can tell you that what is being done under those covers is not
worthy of my comment descriptively at this time, but I will say that it
is an illicit, illegitimate situation that is taking place because you
are taking from a group of people who are in need and you are giving
more to individuals who have and who don't need.
In this country we are all in the same boat together. That is what
the Affordable Care Act did. It was an aspiration for health care for
everyone. It wasn't perfect. It is not a perfect bill. It needs some
repairs done, if you will, some enhancements. We have never had the
cooperation from the other side of the aisle to do anything to enhance
that foundation that was already laid.
Nobody can argue with the fact that 30 million people who did not
have health care access and now having it is a bad thing. Nobody can
argue that. They could argue that: Well, the way that it was done was
bad. They say that we rushed it through without any input from them,
but there were literally dozens of public hearings and markups. The
bill, all 1,000 pages, was available for everyone to be able to read.
They talk about reading the bill. Well, there are so many bills
coming through right now that they don't want people to take the time
to read them. That is why they introduce them late in the day and then
they schedule markups for them without even putting them in front of
the committee for a hearing. No airing out of the bill and what it
does.
Why are they holding this and hiding it from the American people?
It is because they are trying to get away with something that is
going to be bad for the people. That is why.
They knew that their changes, their repeal and replacement bill, if
properly vetted, if the American people had an opportunity to learn
what is in it, they knew it would not be popular. That is why they hid
it from the public. That is why they are not having any hearings on it.
They just want to proceed straight to a markup; pass it out of the
committee; put it on the floor of the House; pass it out of the House
with little debate; send it over to the Senate for a rubber stamp, they
hope; and then on to President Trump, who, as I said, when did he know
that this bill that he was going to be presented with perhaps did not
provide coverage for everybody and was not far better in coverage than
the Affordable Care Act? When was it that he learned that?
The American people want to know a whole lot. There is a whole lot to
investigate about President Trump and his campaign. There is a whole
lot to investigate about this repeal and replacement of the Affordable
Care Act with an inferior product, one that is slanted to the rich and
hurts the working people of this country.
Then it guts the Medicaid program, which millions and millions of
people depend on to keep grandma and granddaddy and momma and daddy at
the nursing home. Medicaid helps to make nursing home care affordable.
But under this healthcare repeal legislation that the Republicans
have filed, they are going to cut Medicaid. They are going to use the
expansion of the Medicaid program which enabled 10 million people to
gain coverage that they could not afford, and they are going to cut
that. At the same time, they are going to cut the other part of the
Medicaid program which provides for people to be able to have their
loved ones properly cared for at the nursing home, instead of down in
the basement or upstairs in the spare bedroom.
So, get ready, ladies and gentlemen, for that inevitability if this
legislation passes. Get ready for your loved ones to have no place to
go, no nursing home facility to take care of them, because they will
not be able to afford it and you will not be able to afford it.
Who will suffer most?
Momma and daddy and granddaddy and grandma. They are the ones that
get the care that is so needed for the elderly.
So in this bill, where they are going to cut 20 million people off
the healthcare rolls, they are going to cut momma and daddy from the
nursing home by cutting the Medicaid program and turning it into a
block grant program and turning it over to the States.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
[[Page H1550]]
Mr. BARLETTA. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Barletta) that the House suspend the
rules and pass the bill, H.R. 375.
The question was taken.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds
being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the
ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a
quorum is not present.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further
proceedings on this question will be postponed.
The point of no quorum is considered withdrawn.
____________________