Christopher and Dana Reeve Quality of Life for Persons with Paralysis Act

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1554, the Christopher Reeve Paralysis Act, legislation that will enhance paralysis research and improve the lives of people suffering from mobility impairments caused by disease or accident.

I first introduced the Christopher Reeve Paralysis Act in 2003 after meeting with the extraordinary man for whom this bill is named. Christopher Reeve told me how dramatically the accident that left him paralyzed changed his life and forced him to completely depend on others for his everyday needs.

What impressed me so much about Christopher was not only his strength and courage in dealing with what only people similarly situated can understand, but his resolve and determination to one day walk again and help others who shared his condition. And though Chris never walked again before his death, he and his wife Dana, who also has since so tragically passed away, pushed to the national forefront the issue of the need for better research into paralysis and greater emphasis on rehabilitation. This bill is part of their legacy.

The substitute amendment offered to the bill this evening represents a significant step forward in our efforts to find a cure for paralysis and mobility impairment. The amendment authorizes grants through the Department of Health and Human Services to expand research on paralysis, better coordinate that research, and intensify efforts to translate clinical research into progress on rehabilitation and improving the quality-of-life of people with paralysis and mobility impairment.

The bill will encourage the development of unique programs through the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to improve the quality of life and long-term health status of persons with paralysis and other physical disabilities. CDC grants could be used to help states develop coordinated services to assist people with paralysis or for non-profit organizations to improve access to important services and better integrate people with paralysis into society.

It is my hope that efforts in these areas ultimately will help translate clinical research into evidence-based best practices for treating paralysis and improving quality-of-life for mobility-impaired individuals.

Finally, the amendment renames the bill the Christopher and Dana Reeve Quality of Life for Persons with Paralysis Act, to appropriately recognize the tireless efforts of both Chris and Dana Reeve, both of whom were taken from this Earth much too soon.

There is no question that this bill is desperately needed. Though Christopher Reeve was certainly one of the most vocal and visible advocates for people affected by paralysis, he fought for many more who shared his condition. And while there are tremendous economic costs associated with disability caused by paralysis, we cannot begin to measure the impact that this condition has on those living with paralysis and on those who love and care for them.

Before I conclude, I want to thank Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Joe Barton and Health Subcommittee Chairman Nathan Deal, both for their willingness to move forward on this bill and for their leadership on issues important to so many of us. I am proud to have worked with you both for so many years and wish you well as you continue your service in Congress.

I also want to thank full Committee Ranking Member John Dingell, Subcommittee Ranking Member Sherrod Brown, and the majority and minority committee staffs for their work on this measure, especially Randy Pate of the majority staff and Cheryl Jaeger of Majority Whip Blunt's staff. I also would be remiss if I did not thank several former staffers of mine, Steve Tilton, Jeremy Allen, and Jeanne Haggerty, for their previous work on this bill. The work of all of these dedicated people has led us to where we are today.

Mr. Speaker, we clearly need to better focus and enhance our national effort to cure paralysis and improve the lives of people who suffer from mobility impairment. The passage and enactment of the Christopher and Dana Reeve Quality of Life for Persons with Paralysis Act will be another critical step toward helping millions of Americans walk again, and carrying on the fight that Christopher and Dana Reeve fought so valiantly. I urge all of our colleagues to support it.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Energy and Commerce be discharged from further consideration of the bill (H.R. 1554) to enhance and further research into paralysis and to improve rehabilitation and the quality of life for persons living with paralysis and other physical disabilities, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

We have to ask the desk. I think the answer is yes. The desk has the copy. The number is on the bottom left-hand corner. It has been cleared.

We can withdraw it. I have no problem asking unanimous consent to withdraw this request to verify that what you have is the right version.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw the amendment to H.R. 1554.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Energy and Commerce be discharged from further consideration of the bill (H.R. 1554) to enhance and further research into paralysis and to improve rehabilitation and the quality of life for persons living with paralysis and other physical disabilities, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. Speaker, I offer an amendment in the nature of a substitute.

Yes.

Mr. Speaker, reserving an objection at this time, again I was going to ask the chairman, the version I have now is December 8 at 5:25 p.m. Does that include the amendment that the gentleman now proposed? Or is this something new?

So the amendment that you proposed would be the version that I have now for December 8 at 5:25 p.m.?

Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation of objection.

Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, again on this one, I would ask the chairman if the bill we are considering now, as amended, is the one timed 12:24, November 30, 2006, 12:24 p.m.

Again, I am concerned at this hour about what we are actually considering.

So this is something that was changed within the last hour or so again?

I would appreciate that.