[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 155 (2009), Part 16]
[House]
[Pages 21303-21305]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                          LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM

  Mr. McCARTHY of California. Mr. Speaker, I ask to address the House 
for 1 minute for the purpose of inquiring about next week's schedule, 
and I yield to the gentleman from Maryland, the majority leader.
  Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  On Monday, the House will meet at 12:30 p.m. for morning-hour debate 
and 2 p.m. for legislative business, with votes postponed until 6:30 
p.m.
  On Tuesday, the House will meet at 10:30 a.m. for morning-hour debate 
and 12 o'clock for legislative business.
  On Wednesday and Thursday, the House will meet at 10 a.m. for 
legislative business.
  On Friday, no votes are expected in the House.
  We will consider several bills under suspension of the rules. The 
complete list of suspension bills will be announced by the close of 
business tomorrow.
  In addition, we will consider H.R. 3246, the Advanced Vehicle 
Technology Act of 2009, and H.R. 3221, the Student Aid and Fiscal 
Responsibility Act of 2009.
  I yield back.
  Mr. McCARTHY of California. Since this is the first colloquy of the 
fall, I would like to give the Members and the public a sense of what 
the House will be considering over the next couple of months. What do 
you expect to be voting on during the months of September and October?
  And I yield to the gentleman.
  Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  First of all, of course, as you know, the House has passed all 12 of 
our appropriation bills, so we're ready to go to conference on all 12 
of those bills. The Senate has passed four of their bills and is 
working on the balance. We hope to conference and have on the floor a 
number of those bills before the end of September, before the beginning 
of the fiscal year. There obviously will be, given the Senate's 
schedule, a requirement for a continuing resolution for some period of 
time, perhaps in a 30-day period time frame. So we will be considering 
those bills, those conference reports.
  In addition, as you heard, the student loan reform bill will be on 
the floor next week, we believe. Defense authorization is in 
conference, and we expect that conference report. Health care reform, 
obviously we expect to do that this fall. Regulatory reform is expected 
to be an item on our agenda in the House this fall. Additionally, we 
will be waiting on the Senate on a number of items that we have sent to 
them, including climate change and food safety, which, as you know, the 
House passed. So those will be some of the items. That is not an 
exhaustive list, but is, I think, a good list of what we expect to be 
considering during the coming weeks.
  Mr. McCARTHY of California. Reclaiming my time, I thank the 
gentleman.

[[Page 21304]]

  Does the gentleman expect the House to be in session beyond the 
targeted adjournment date of October 30?
  And I yield.
  Mr. HOYER. I think the honest answer to that is yes. Obviously, that 
was a target date, not knowing exactly how quickly we would proceed.
  Clearly, health care, among other issues, is taking, as we understand 
it needed to, a longer time. And so consideration of that and the 
appropriation bills and other authorization bills that are going 
between the two Houses will, I think, clearly take us beyond October 
30.
  Mr. McCARTHY of California. Does the gentleman see the House taking 
any days or weeks off that are currently scheduled between now and the 
30th of October?
  Mr. HOYER. Let me say that I believe that every week scheduled in 
October we will be meeting. However, in November, as the gentleman 
probably knows, Veterans Day falls exactly in the middle of the week on 
a Wednesday. We are now talking about what that means in terms of 
schedule because obviously all the Members want to be home with their 
various organizations, municipalities, counties and communities to 
honor our veterans on that day and honor the service of those who have 
kept this country free.
  As a result, we are trying to figure out whether or not it makes any 
sense to either schedule a Monday and Tuesday or a Thursday and Friday 
and have Members come back and forth for that. We have not made that 
decision, but it is, in terms of the weeks that we are looking at over 
the next 10 weeks, a week that may not be one in which we will meet. We 
will try to make that determination very soon, within the next couple 
of weeks, part of which will be dictated by the schedule, what is 
moving, how much time we need available.
  In addition to that, we will not be meeting Thanksgiving week. I say 
that pretty definitively. Obviously, if we could finish the Monday or 
Tuesday of Thanksgiving work, finish in terms of adjournment sine die 
for this session, then I think that might change that. But other than 
that, my expectation is we would not be meeting Thanksgiving week if we 
need to meet longer than Thanksgiving week.
  Mr. McCARTHY of California. I thank the gentleman.
  Currently, you have scheduled out between now and October 30. Do you 
see any of those Mondays or Fridays that maybe we would not be in 
session, having done our work during the week, knowing that the debate 
is going on still within health care and others that people can be back 
in their district? And I yield.
  Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  My expectation is that it is quite possible that we would take off 
either a Monday that is now scheduled--or two, or three--or a Friday, 
one or the other. Given the flow of work, we did a lot of work, worked 
very hard, and we passed a lot of legislation, but obviously to 
complete that we need it to come back from the Senate, need to complete 
conference reports. So to some degree, the flow of work will dictate 
that schedule; but on the other hand, we want to give all the Members 
on both sides appropriate notice so they can utilize the time at home 
to be discussing with their constituents pending legislation, and 
particularly the health care bill.
  Mr. McCARTHY of California. Would the gentleman be able to tell early 
for at least September, knowing the Mondays and Fridays that we may be 
able to be working at home?
  Mr. HOYER. I'm sorry. Could you repeat that?
  Mr. McCARTHY of California. I just wonder if the gentleman, knowing 
the schedule of all the Mondays and Fridays now, if you've already made 
that decision which Mondays and which Fridays?
  Mr. HOYER. We have not. What I indicated is that I hope to be working 
on that, and I hope next week to have at least made a preliminary 
decision on some of the Mondays and/or Fridays. It may not be all of 
the ones that we will be able to have Members have an opportunity to 
work at home. And again, it's a little difficult to do that because 
it's a little difficult to predict the workflow schedule.
  Mr. McCARTHY of California. Well, I appreciate the gentleman's 
answer.
  Mr. HOYER. But I want to reiterate, we do expect next week to at 
least take a number in the relatively near term--and that means 
September--so that Members will have prior notice.
  Mr. McCARTHY of California. Well, I thank the gentleman.
  Knowing that we heard the President last night, and we're all coming 
off from an August recess where we watched America wake up and really 
pay attention to what is going on here in Congress and voice their 
opinion when it comes to health care, and having watched that and 
having my own townhall meetings, watching other Members' townhall 
meetings throughout the country and some of the questions raised, I 
listened to the President last night talk about ideas and a public 
plan, and others--the gentleman yourself had talked during your 
townhalls--and some leadership said the public plan has to be in the 
plan or a bill will not go through. I know the gentleman from Maryland 
said it doesn't have to be exactly a public plan in there.

                              {time}  1230

  Does the Democratic leadership position include a government option 
or exactly a public plan or a trigger?
  I yield to the gentleman.
  Mr. HOYER. You heard the President's comments last night. I agree 
strongly with the President and with the Speaker, and I think, frankly, 
there is no difference in the three of us. We all believe that a public 
option is an important option, A, to save money and, B, to give 
consumers options that they might not otherwise have and bring prices 
down for consumers as well as for government. So there is no difference 
there on the importance of the public option.
  I am for a public option, as you probably heard me. I don't know 
whether you watched my town meeting, but that question was asked and I 
responded I am for the public option.
  What I have said is essentially what the President said last night, 
that there is much in this bill that I think advantages consumers, 
businesses, individuals and families, and I think the public option is 
important, but there are other things in the bill which are important. 
But I expect that we are going to bring a bill to the floor. I am 
certainly hopeful that it has a public option in it. We think that is 
the best alternative. The President has indicated he thinks that is the 
best alternative.
  He did, however, say, and I share his view, if there are other ways 
people think we can do it, provide that competitive model to bring 
prices down and to make sure consumers get the best product available, 
if there are other ways to do that, then we are certainly open to 
hearing them.
  Mr. McCARTHY of California. Does the gentleman believe that health 
care will come to the floor in the House before in the Senate?
  Mr. HOYER. I think health care will come to the floor in the House 
when it is ready to come, and what I mean by that is when we have a 
consensus on exactly how the bill ought to be fashioned. We believe on 
this side that the committees are some 85 percent in agreement, as you 
know, the Energy and Commerce Committee, the Education and Labor 
Committee, and the Ways and Means Committee. As you also know, there 
are differences between those bills, and we are working on that at this 
point in time to see how we can make those compatible. The President's 
comments last night will obviously also be taken into consideration.
  So we will bring to the floor a bill that we believe reflects the 
President's view, our view, and hopefully we would hope the views in 
part at least of some of the Members on your side of the aisle.
  Mr. McCARTHY of California. I thank the gentleman.
  Reclaiming my time, I notice you refer to the bill and sometimes 
another bill, and you have this bill H.R. 3200 done by one side of the 
aisle, passed three committees. I know last time when President Clinton 
was in and they took up health care and they produced a bill in Ways 
and Means, it took

[[Page 21305]]

7 weeks of debate. I know this was 48 hours and others were a short 
time period.
  When you refer to that bill, are you referring to H.R. 3200 coming 
before this body, this House?
  I yield to the gentleman.
  Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman.
  First of all, let me say I don't know where he gets 2 weeks. The Ways 
and Means Committee was in discussion. You may mean formal hearings on 
the bill. But we have had 80 hearings in the committees over the last 
24 months on health care reform, so it was an extensive part of the 
debate of every candidate for President over the course of 2008, and, 
frankly, prior to 2008.
  This bill and many of its facets have been considered extensively, 
many of which were in plans presented by Presidential candidates on 
both sides of the aisle, Democrat and Republican. And clearly the 
President of the United States talked extensively about his ideas and 
where he wanted to go on health reform, and much of what he said and 
proposed was included in the bills that have been acted upon and I 
think reflect his views as well as the views of many people not only in 
this body but throughout the country.
  So, from that standpoint, we believe this has gotten very extensive 
consideration. I think it is unprecedented. We had over 1,000 town 
meetings on our side. I know you had a number of town meetings on your 
side. I am not sure of the number. But literally I think thousands and 
thousands of Americans had an opportunity to participate and are 
continuing to participate in the discussion of the specifics of this 
bill.
  So we think it has gotten very widespread and very thorough 
consideration. Given that consideration, there are still differences 
that we are working on.
  Mr. McCARTHY of California. Reclaiming my time, just referring back, 
what I said was when the Clinton administration did health care, on 
Ways and Means they debated for 7 weeks, taking the bill up itself. 
When we did it this time, it was 48 hours of presenting the bill, the 
amendments, and being voted out of committee.
  Knowing the call to the American public about transparency, and we 
all heard that during the month of August, would the gentleman allow, 
before any bill comes to the floor--and I guess the bill would be H.R. 
3200, from what I am hearing the gentleman say. I know it is in 
committee, but when you get to that final version----
  Mr. HOYER. Will the gentleman yield, because I want to clarify that.
  H.R. 3200 was a base bill that was put together by the committee 
Chairs, the committee staff, with input from others, as a mark. My 
expectation is that there will be a compendium that will be put 
together and we will probably have a new number on it. So I don't think 
H.R. 3200, which was a base mark, but you understand this was a bill, 
and, as you well know, in three committees, so there may well be a bill 
fashioned from the product of the three committees.
  Mr. McCARTHY of California. Reclaiming my time, so it would be a 
different number, but in essence the same bill.
  Would the gentleman allow, before that bill is voted on on this floor 
when you come to the conclusion of where that bill ends up, would we be 
able to have the time to go back to the American public and, again, all 
of us have townhall meetings again for the transparency of saying this 
is the bill that would be voted on in the House?
  I yield to the gentleman.
  Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  There has been unprecedented, I reiterate, I don't think you can 
remember, and I have been here 29 years and I can't remember a bill 
that has been more widely vetted than this bill in terms of the 
American public. Maybe the Social Security proposal the President some 
years ago had, that was pretty widely vetted, but I don't think as 
widely vetted as this proposal.
  So I say to the gentleman, you go and you vet the bill, you discuss 
alternatives, you then come back after having listened to those 
alternatives and fashion a bill. You don't have new committee hearings, 
whether it is a health care bill or any other bill. You amend it and 
you perfect it pursuant to hearings, and then you bring it to the 
floor. I don't expect we will treat this bill any differently.
  Mr. McCARTHY of California. I thank the gentleman.
  The only thing I would ask, knowing that the American public did have 
this bill vetted but the majority of the American public disagreed with 
this bill, disagreed with the public option, and having the 
transparency here that the American public is asking, having the 
American public so engaged and educated on health care and it being 
such an issue, I always thought it would be helpful not only to this 
body but to the American public itself, before we go and vote again, 
whatever comes before that bill to come to the House, that you allow 
the opportunity for Members to go home and have a townhall and explain 
what is in the final version of the bill before that vote takes place. 
I think the American public would appreciate it, and it would be a 
great opportunity for both sides.
  Mr. HOYER. Well, if the gentleman will yield, I want to say clearly, 
as you know, the base bill, the mark bill from which the three 
committees worked, as you know, was put online before the August break, 
so that it has been online for a very long period of time. Now, there 
will be changes. There will be amendments. There have already been 
amendments in the three committees and those have been online.
  So, I think the gentleman's concern is correct. We share it. We want 
to make sure the public has the opportunity to know what is being done, 
that we transparently have the specifics for the American public to 
know what we are doing and for the Members to have that knowledge, and 
we intend to do that.
  Now, whether or not we are going to have a timeframe in which 
somebody can have a townhall meeting, which may take a month to notice 
and get together, I think you would be shocked if I responded to you 
that, oh, sure, we will just wait around until you have your town 
meetings. So I am not going to say that. But I do appreciate the 
gentleman's point, which is we want to make sure the public does in 
fact have notice.
  Mr. McCARTHY of California. Well, I thank the gentleman and I 
appreciate his answers today. The one thing I would say, I did this 
townhall in Bakersfield, California, where I did no notice, I didn't do 
a mailer, and gave enough opportunity. We have an opportunity now to 
know we will be in past October. I had 3,000 people, that is 1 percent 
of the whole city's population, turn out, and very engaged, very 
knowledgeable of the bill itself.
  So I just hope the opportunity comes that knowing maybe there is a 
different number on this bill, but it is still H.R. 3200, that the 
public would be able to see it. And I will tell the gentleman that the 
Republicans on this side have a lot of ideas about health care, a lot 
of bills out there, of ways that we can lower the costs, take care of 
preexisting conditions and actually make health care much better for 
all Americans.
  I appreciate the time and yield back.

                          ____________________