[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 163 (2017), Part 3]
[House]
[Pages 3565-3567]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                          CONCERNS OF THE DAY

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Bacon). Under the Speaker's announced 
policy of January 3, 2017, the Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from 
Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee) for 17 minutes.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, thank you for your courtesies.
  Mr. Speaker, there are a number of topics that I choose to debate 
this evening, but before I do that, I would like to first raise a very 
important concern. I will soon draft a letter that my colleagues will 
join in signing to the President of the United States on the extensive 
crisis of starvation in Somalia and South Sudan.
  Just recently, we met with leadership--with my colleague Karen Bass 
and a number of other colleagues--of South Sudan speaking about the 
extensive starvation in sub-Saharan Africa.
  I am looking forward to a response from this White House upon receipt 
of the letter that they will engage with the world community on 
providing immediate food aid and other resources to the people of sub-
Saharan Africa, particularly Somalia and South Sudan.
  It is something that I am well aware of because my colleague, the 
late Mickey Leland, Congressman from the 18th Congressional District in 
1989, and years before that as the co-chair of the Select Committee on 
Hunger, was very concerned about starvation in that very same area 
because of the drought and terrible climatic conditions, huge loss of 
life. Congressman Leland was constantly responding with his own 
personal sacrifice of taking food over to that area as well as seeking 
to encourage others in the world family, United Nations to do so. In 
1989, he, in actuality, lost his life in a plane crash in Ethiopia 
delivering resources to those individuals caught in a terrible 
condition, a valley, a desert-like atmosphere attempting to save their 
lives or to bring grain in. I know full well that his spirit reigns as 
he might have been engaged in this if he were alive in 2017 to see this 
terrible disaster occurring right in front of us.
  We need the United States to be very active in the world community. 
The U.N. Secretary-General has now pronounced this to be a horrific 
disaster needing the attention of world leaders and the world 
community. I want to put that on the record because I want to offer to 
the people of Somalia and South Sudan my deepest sympathy. There are 
other issues in South Sudan that we must address, but we also need to 
be concerned in the area of food starvation, loss of lives of hundreds 
of thousands of women and children who are now suffering, and it needs 
to be addressed.

                              {time}  2130

  But I really came to the floor in the backdrop of the introduction of 
a document that is represented to be an answer to the need of Americans 
for health care. Certainly the document is one that is being proposed 
by those who believe that there is a need.
  I might offer to say that there may be a need to improve some aspects 
of existing coverage, which has worked so well under the Affordable 
Care Act. And, yes, to those opponents of the Affordable Care Act, I 
would be pleased to debate you that, in fact, it has worked well.
  It has worked well because 30 million Americans have insurance. It 
has worked well because 150 million Americans have guaranteed health 
benefits. It has worked well because low-income Americans have access 
if they are able to come under the expanded Medicare to health care. It 
has worked well because of young people being on the insurance of their 
families to the age of 26. That was first on the Affordable Care Act. 
It has worked well because we can provide for the preexisting 
condition, for you to be able to have insurance. We can provide for no 
caps on your insurance, and also payments to hospitals for 
uncompensated care. We can provide for that because of the mandate and 
the tax subsidies that go to the people to allow them to secure the 
insurance that they would desire.
  There are certainly ways that we look to improve, and it would be 
nice if we had bipartisan cooperation to do that. But now we have a 
document that it is important for the American people to know that the 
question of how many people will lose coverage has not been answered. 
How many people will be covered has not been answered by this new 
document that pretends to respond to the healthcare needs of Americans. 
There is no documentation as to what the quality of the coverage will 
be. And to those listening who are concerned about the financial fiscal 
responsibility of this country and this Congress, no one knows the cost 
of this insurance.

[[Page 3566]]

  So I would make the argument that we have a real problem and that 
there is a document that is supposed to be marked up as a healthcare 
bill for which the Republicans have not received any response from CBO. 
Let me indicate that when Democrats were seeking to work with 
Republicans in 2009, we had a CBO estimate before our markup began. 
Certainly, a request was made by Republicans about the bill; and, 
interestingly enough, they asked about coverage, and they asked about 
quality and cost.
  We know that it is almost certain that Americans will lose coverage 
under this new document. We also know that jobs will be lost. We also 
know that in my State of Texas, very much is dependent or concerned, if 
you will, with rural hospitals, that rural hospitals will suffer 
greatly by the loss if it happens--and we hope not--of the Affordable 
Care Act, because rural hospitals and the rural communities throughout 
Texas will be devastated.
  We also know that, with the mandate going away, the tax subsidies 
will be going not to people where they should be so that you can 
provide for your insurance as we understand it--this document is still 
a mystery--but it will be going to insurance companies. And we also 
know that, if you are 50 and older, it will cost some five times more 
than if you are younger. A heavy burden on working Americans, with no 
explanation. We know that the cost is going up and that you may be 
paying an amount that continues to go up every month.
  Let me be very clear. We are trying to get the answers, but it makes 
for a very difficult process of getting the answers for a bill that has 
just been released in the last 24 hours, and, in actuality, no one 
knows really what is in it, and it will then go to committee to be 
marked up.
  In my State of Texas, almost 2 million--1,874,000--individuals in the 
State who have gained coverage since the Affordable Care Act was 
implemented would lose their coverage if the Affordable Care Act is 
entirely or partially repealed.
  Mr. Speaker, 1,092,650 individuals stand to lose their coverage if we 
dismantle the exchanges which allow people to access insurance 
companies all over the Nation.
  Mr. Speaker, 913,177 individuals in the State of Texas who received 
financial assistance to purchase health insurance in 2016 and received 
an average of $271 per person would risk having coverage become 
unaffordable because they would not get that money anymore. That money 
would go to insurance companies.
  Let me also say that 1,107,000 individuals in the State could have 
insurance if the State of Texas additionally would have accepted the 
Affordable Care Act's Medicaid expansion. I can tell you that States 
like Kentucky understand the full impact of the Medicaid expansion, and 
they do not want to see it go away.
  Mr. Speaker, 508,000 children have regained coverage since the ACA 
has been implemented, and they will lose their insurance.
  Mr. Speaker, 205,000 young adults, as I have indicated, in the State 
would be able to stay on their parents' insurance. We don't know if 
that is clear because we really don't know the funding structure of 
this new document that has now been thrown to the American people.
  We know that 646,415 individuals in the State who received cost share 
reductions to lower out-of-pocket costs, such as deductibles, copays, 
and coinsurance, are now simply at risk. We are all at risk. We are 
all, frankly, at risk. So I would have to ask the question: What does 
this plan really do to help America?
  We know that 10,278,005 individuals in the State of Texas who now 
have private health insurance that covers preventative services without 
copays, coinsurance, or deductibles may lose these benefits if the 
Affordable Care Act goes. Women in the State who can now purchase 
insurance for the same price as men, eliminating the disparities that 
occurred before 2009 and 2010, may be at risk again for having to pay 
more money for their insurance--the actual disparity in health care 
being totally eliminated--and insurance companies being able to charge 
women more than their male counterparts.
  Roughly, 4 million individuals in the State with preexisting diseases 
may, in fact, not have that because what is the basis of the financial 
structure that can pay to ensure that those with preexisting diseases 
in this new document called health care, whether there will be any 
money to cover those individuals with preexisting diseases, we don't 
even know that. I think that is something important to note.
  Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, because this is a mysterious bill, we 
know that it will mostly benefit the rich. Households at the top of the 
U.S. income ladder would see taxes on their wages and investments drop 
under this bill. No one has anything against our friends that are doing 
quite well, but it will be on the backs of working Americans.
  The Republican plan to replace ObamaCare includes a tax break for 
insurance company executives making over half a million dollars a year. 
What a great gift. We are about to approach Easter, a time of 
sacrifice, and Passover, and isn't it interesting that what we would be 
facing is a gift in this tax season of a great tax break of our friends 
making over $500,000 a year. Meanwhile, working Americans would lose 
coverage and be forced to pay more for less.
  According to CNN, most healthcare experts agree that millions of 
Americans are likely to lose their coverage under this new document 
that is to reflect health care. Mothers: likely to make maternity 
coverage, among other services, immensely expensive, if available at 
all.
  In fact, I recall certainly as a young mother that one of the most 
frightening things is to not have insurance or the kind of complete 
coverage that one needs with expectancy of the birth of a child. Not 
knowing what may happen to the mother during birth, what challenges the 
new baby may face, and to face the uncertainty of not having full 
maternity coverage is devastating.
  Seniors, pregnant women, and children on Medicaid, under the Medicaid 
expansion, which has been adopted in 31 States and Washington, D.C., 
more than half of the 50 States would shut down at the end of 2019. So 
you would get a few more years, and then hardworking Americans would be 
thrown off into the street in 31 States, including Washington, D.C. 
Women, seniors, children, in particular pregnant women, would see their 
health care thrown to the wind, extinguished, burned up.
  The bill also proposes a major overhaul of Medicaid, a Federal State 
program covering more than 70 million low-income and disabled 
Americans. I believe that the proposal is to block grant Medicaid 
dollars under the pretense of letting States be creative.
  I want Americans and my colleagues to understand what creativity 
means. Creativity simply means that they will do everything they can to 
shorten and cheapen the health benefits that you will get. And it will 
be made through deals, how little money can we spend, whether we can 
use the Medicaid block grant dollars for some other things, a wish list 
that we may want in the State that we come from, the 31 States, plus 
Washington, D.C.
  Instead of the current open-ended Federal entitlement, States would 
get capped payment block grants based on the number of Medicaid 
enrollees. Block grants, basically. And when it runs out, you are in a 
whole world of trouble. Or, as we say, you are up the river without a 
paddle--you are up the river without a paddle. No one comes to your 
rescue when you are up the river without a paddle.
  Seniors who have worked so hard who are on Medicare will have fiscal 
problems themselves. It will exacerbate the fiscal problems of Medicare 
by hastening the exhaustion of the program's trust fund by 4 years. Our 
commitment is to ensure that the Medicare trust fund clearly is strong, 
solid, and solvent. Whenever I meet with my seniors, I tell them my 
commitment--strong, solid, and solvent. But with this document called 
health care, we are in jeopardy.
  So it is clearly a problem, and it certainly is not gathering support 
in unanimity on the other side. Mr. Speaker,

[[Page 3567]]

someone is complaining about it. It happens to be Republicans, so it 
looks like it is going to be a rough road.
  But my concluding remark, Mr. Speaker, is that this document that 
represents itself as a healthcare answer has so many problems, so many 
people will suffer, so much loss, that I ask my colleagues to reject 
this legislation as it is presently constructed, and I look forward to 
working to better health care for all Americans.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

                          ____________________