To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to delay the date on which the accreditation requirement under the Medicare Program applies to suppliers of durable medical equipment that are pharmacies.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 4506) to authorize the appointment of additional bankruptcy judges, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 4506, the Bankruptcy Judgeship Act of 2010, provides new resources for bankruptcy courts to handle the growing number and complexity of bankruptcy cases. This economy has resulted in many people having to seek bankruptcy who never would have dreamed they would have before. And the complexity of the cases, from our major automobile manufacturers on through other reorganizations, have grown in complexity for the bankruptcy judges to be involved in.

The bill authorizes the creation of 13 new permanent bankruptcy judges, the conversion of 22 temporary judgeships to permanent judgeships, and the extension of two judgeships for another 5 years. The act will help bankruptcy courts in 25 different Federal judicial districts around this country.

Bankruptcies had been steadily on the rise since October 2006. These events, bankruptcies rising and the financial crisis, combined with the continuing mortgage foreclosure crisis, consumer credit problems, and health care crises, have exacerbated this trend significantly and caused the bankruptcy courts much additional work.

According to the Administrative Office of the United States Courts, bankruptcy filings increased by over 300,000 from fiscal year 2008 to fiscal year 2009. That is a 34.5 percent increase in 1 year. The previous year they had increased by 30.2 percent. And the Wall Street Journal recently reported another sharp increase in personal bankruptcy filings in 2009, up 32 percent from 2008. According to the Wall Street Journal, these increases were driven by high unemployment rates and the continuing housing crisis, both of which have affected not only those on the economic margins, but also a growing number of middle class families who desire to work but have had to turn to our Nation's bankruptcy system for help as a last resort.

In addition to the growing numbers of bankruptcy cases, the cases have also grown more complex, particularly in business bankruptcies. As I mentioned earlier, in 2009 two of the big three, General Motors and Chrysler, two companies upon which tens of thousands of workers, thousands of dealers, hundreds of suppliers, and many communities across this Nation depended for their livelihoods, went through quick but nonetheless intense bankruptcy processes. Bankruptcy courts performed admirably but under strain.

Outside the automobile industry, as I mentioned earlier, businesses such as Delta Airlines to Lehman Brothers to Circuit City have all turned to bankruptcy for relief in recent years, with the same kind of extraordinary burden imposed on the bankruptcy courts.

While the workload for bankruptcy courts is increasing, judicial resources are in danger of decreasing. Many current bankruptcy judgeships are authorized on a temporary basis, and some are set to expire soon. A well-functioning bankruptcy system is absolutely essential to helping individuals and businesses weather our Nation's current economic difficulties. Having a sufficient number of bankruptcy judges is a key to making the system work, and has never been more important than today.

H.R. 4506, the Bankruptcy Judgeship Act of 2010, addresses these needs by authorizing the creation of 13 new permanent bankruptcy judgeships and the conversion of 22 temporary judgeships to permanent judgeships. Additionally, it extends the temporary authorization for two judgeships for another 5 years. These new, converted, and extended bankruptcy judgeships reflect the recommendations of the Judicial Conference of the United States. Those recommendations in turn are the culmination of an extensive and careful survey and review process that thoroughly assessed the bankruptcy judgeship needs of every Federal judicial district in the country. In essence transparent, fair, methodical, rational.

I note that a significant part of the conference's assessment of bankruptcy judges' workload depends on the use of case weights that were developed almost two decades ago, prior to the enactment of the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005, which we still labor under. BAPCPA created numerous new motions that bankruptcy judges are now required to consider.

If anything, the Judicial Conference recommendations may underestimate the need of the workload and the need of new bankruptcy judges. In short, the conference's recommendations, as reflected in the new bankruptcy judgeships authorized by H.R. 4506, may actually be too conservative.

To pay for 13 new judgeships, the bill also raises the filing fees for chapter 7 and 13 cases by $1, and for chapter 11 cases, which are business bankruptcies, by $42. While I understand that filing fees are needed for the successful operation of the bankruptcy system, I believe they are already too high, particularly for consumer debtors seeking bankruptcy relief because they are in dire straits. In this one instance we ultimately determined that a fee increase was the only practical way to get the needed judgeships in a timely manner, which will allow for the efficient functioning of the bankruptcy system to the ultimate benefit of debtors.

So in passing a bankruptcy system, we wanted to have funds to make it self-sufficient. To put the bankruptcy system of our country in bankruptcy while saving the bankruptcy system seemed like an oxymoron.

But I would urge in the future we rely on something other than bankruptcy filing fee increases to pay for new bankruptcy judgeships. The last time Congress addressed the issue of bankruptcy judgeships was 5 years ago when it authorized 28 temporary judgeships in the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005. Those temporary judgeships are now about to expire.

Moreover, the last time Congress authorized new permanent bankruptcy judgeships was in 1992. It is well past the time that we address the critical issue of bankruptcy judgeships needs, and I am pleased that we are able to do so today.

I thank the Judiciary Committee chairman, John Conyers, and Ranking Member Lamar Smith for being original cosponsors of this important legislation and our Judiciary Committee working in a bipartisan fashion to pass the bill. I also thank Trent Franks, the ranking member of the Judiciary Subcommittee on Commercial and Administration Law, for his support of this bill. I guess it wasn't an oxymoron but an inconsistency.

I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the bipartisanship under which we have worked on this bill. I thank Mr. Poe and the minority ranking member, Mr. Smith, and Chairman Conyers and the staff who worked on this bill, and the Judicial Conference. I hope that we pass this bill. I call on Members to vote ``aye'' on H.R. 4506 and pass the bill.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, on that, I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 3663) to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to delay the date on which the accreditation requirement under the Medicare Program applies to suppliers of durable medical equipment that are pharmacies.

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 in the Record.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Presently under Medicare, pharmacies supply Medicare beneficiaries with durable medical equipment, or DME, such as canes, crutches and diabetes testing strips. Pharmacists not only provide access to these items but also provide critical services, such as counseling on patient compliance and adherence, which often results in improved health outcomes.

In spite of the important and positive role that many pharmacists play in the Medicare DME program, in the past there has been a lot of fraud and abuse that has occurred in the world of DME supply. Accordingly, Congress stepped in and imposed new requirements on DME suppliers that would help rout out fraud, waste and abuse. One of the requirements is to require suppliers of durable medical equipment to obtain quality accreditation by October 1, 2009, or this Thursday, tomorrow.

Requiring DME suppliers to be accredited would help ensure that the integrity of the Medicare program is protected and makes sure that beneficiaries have access to quality services and supplies. Unfortunately, as pharmacists have tried to comply with this new requirement, those charged with providing accreditation have been unable to keep up with the demand.

Accordingly, a backlog of applications now exists, and there is little hope of having them completed by this week's deadline. If we do nothing, Mr. Speaker, countless pharmacies across the country will be left in limbo, possibly causing problems for beneficiaries seeking to access the DME supplies that they need. Congress should do everything it can to avoid this kind of disruption. The health reform bill provides some relief in this area, but its details are still being worked out.

That's why I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this commonsense measure which will temporarily delay the accreditation requirement from taking effect. Congress can fine-tune the health care reform legislation to address any remaining problems after January 1, which is the new deadline.

I want to thank my colleague on the Energy and Commerce Committee, Mr. Space of Ohio, for spearheading this effort, as well as Representatives Jo Ann Emerson, Marion Berry and Jerry Moran.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Space), who is the sponsor of this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, in closing, I just want to mention that my colleague Mr. Stark, from the Ways and Means Committee, wanted to speak in favor of this bill but was unable to be here. I also neglected to thank Mr. Terry, who was the lead Republican sponsor of the legislation.

I urge passage of the bill.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I rise in support of H.R. 3663, which very simply delays the quality accreditation requirements for pharmacies until no sooner than January 1, 2010. Without this legislation, accreditation requirements would go into effect tomorrow and many pharmacies would not be able to supply our Medicare beneficiaries with needed, durable medical equipment such as diabetes testing strips or canes.

I've heard from a number of independent pharmacies in my rural northern California district who have expressed serious concerns about the cost of complying with this new regulation. In many cases, these pharmacies are the only source of basic medical supplies for miles around and they are already strapped for cash because of reimbursement charges at the Federal and State level. Along with many of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, I have taken the position that State-regulated pharmacies should be completely exempted from the accreditation requirement. At a minimum, I believe all Members can support a short delay in the deadline.

Certain eligible professionals, such as physicians, are exempt from the requirement for DME suppliers to be accredited as compliant with quality standards. Although pharmacists themselves would be exempt for purposes of DME, it's the physical pharmacy that has the Medicare provider number, and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, CMS, did not exempt pharmacies from the accreditation requirement.

Mr. Speaker, we must make it a priority to reduce waste, fraud, and abuse in Medicare, and we need strong quality standards for DME suppliers. There are simply too many cases of fly-by-night suppliers who have defrauded the Medicare program and the taxpayers by submitting millions of dollars in fake claims for power wheelchairs and other high-end DME.

However, most pharmacies do very little DME business, mostly involving small items like diabetes testing supplies. In addition, pharmacies are regulated at the State level, so those that engage in questionable activities can be identified and prosecuted. I'm confident that the quality accreditation program, with a reasonable exemption for pharmacies, will greatly reduce the $1 billion Medicare spent in 2007 in improper payments for medical equipment and supplies, and I will continue to support the program.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Georgia, Dr. Price.

Mr. Speaker, this is a good, commonsense bill with broad support from both Democrats and Republicans. This is an example of the way that health care policy should be handled in this Congress. I urge an ``aye'' vote.

Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to support H.R. 4506 an act to amend the federal judicial code to authorize the appointment of additional permanent bankruptcy judges in various states. This legislation was introduced by Representative Cohen, my colleague from Tennessee. As a member of the judiciary committee, I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation.

As Chair of the Courts and Competition Policy subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee, I have long championed the increase in federal judgeships across the United States. In this Congress, I introduced H.R. 3663, The Federal Judgeship Act of 2009, which would have done exactly this: increase the number of federal judges.

The U.S. is also in need of more bankruptcy judges. According to Michael J. Melloy, Chair of the Judicial Conference Committee on the Administration of the Bankruptcy System, ``Additional judgeships are critical to ensure that the bankruptcy courts have sufficient judicial resources to effectively and efficiently adjudicate the rights and responsibilities of parties in bankruptcy cases and proceedings''. New bankruptcy judgeships have not been authorized by Congress since 1992, yet case filings have increased by 61 percent.

The current recession has had an adverse effect on the Bankruptcy Court system. The courts are now faced with much more complex and time- consuming bankruptcy cases, not to mention an increase in volume of cases. This has led to more cases per judge than they are able to handle. It is therefore necessary that we act and authorize additional bankruptcy judges.

In addition to authorizing new judges, H.R. 4506 would also convert certain temporary offices of bankruptcy judges to permanent offices, extend certain temporary offices of bankruptcy judges, reduce the amount of bankruptcy fees to be deposited as offsetting

collections to the United States Trustee System Fund, and increase bankruptcy filing fees. All of this would lead to a better and more efficient bankruptcy judicial system.

My state of Georgia has the third highest personal bankruptcy rate in the nation. According to the National Bankruptcy Research Center, Georgia's federal bankruptcy courts handled 66,925 filings during the first 11 months of 2009. This was 22 percent higher than the same period of 2008. This resolution will give the bankruptcy judicial system the resources necessary to review cases in a thorough yet timely manner, and turn the hectic bankruptcy process into a much more manageable one. I urge my colleagues to join me in support of this legislation, and vote in the affirmative for H.R. 4506, the Bankruptcy Judgeship Act of 2010.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may consume.

I rise in support of H.R. 3663, a bill to delay the date for accreditation of durable medical equipment suppliers for 90 days. I want to thank my colleague from Ohio (Mr. Space) for bringing this legislation to the floor today and to correct a provision in the Medicare Improvements for Patients and Providers Act of 2008. That law, which was approved by the House last year, required suppliers of durable medical equipment, DME, to get accreditation before applying to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services to meet the quality standards before being awarded a contract under the Medicare DMEPOS competitive bidding program. The law carved out an exemption for certain physicians and other treating practitioners and also gave the Secretary of HHS the authority to exempt others.

By regulation, CMS determined that pharmacists would fall under this exemption and not be required to obtain accreditation in order to sell durable medical equipment to consumers. Brick and mortar pharmacies, however, would be subject to CMS accreditation under the CMS rules.

The bill would fix this problem and extend the period of time for CMS to complete the accreditation process for those pharmacies that have filed their paperwork. The bill also includes language clarifying that the 90-day extension would not apply to those suppliers wishing to participate in competitive bidding for certain durable medical equipment.

The issue that is facing us here today is that only about 43 percent of the pharmacies have actually had their inspection and review, leaving 50 percent of them out there dangling because of

the backlog from the inspections. So hopefully within the next 90 days from this extension, we'll be able to get caught up, and all of them will be able to continue to sell durable medical goods to the patients who require such goods.

Therefore, I encourage all of my colleagues to vote ``yes'' for this. Again, I want to thank Mr. Space, Chairman Waxman, Ranking Member Barton, and Mr. Pallone for acting so quickly on this when Mr. Space and I brought it up last week for attention.

With that, I reserve the balance of my time.

I thank the gentleman from Ohio for his kind comments. I appreciate it very much, and I enjoyed working with him.

At this time I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Moran), one of the co-chairs of the House Pharmacy Caucus.

Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from California (Mr. Herger), member of the Ways and Means Committee, and I ask unanimous consent that he be allowed to control that time.