Expressing support for designation of May as "National Asthma and Allergy Awareness Month".

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 407) expressing support for designation of May as ``National Asthma and Allergy Awareness Month,'' as amended.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within 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.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of House Resolution 407. This resolution expresses support for the designation of the month of May as National Asthma and Allergy Awareness Month. I would like to thank my colleague, Congressman Dave Reichert of Washington, who partnered with me on this resolution. Congressman Reichert and I cochair the Congressional Children's Health Care Caucus.

Today's resolution focuses on two conditions that affect millions of Americans, asthma and allergy. Asthma is a respiratory disease that is caused when the lungs become inflamed and constricted. Asthma attacks can be so severe that they can be life-threatening.

An estimated 20 million Americans currently have asthma, and it is the most chronic condition in children. Asthma accounts for nearly 2 million emergency room visits per year, and costs America about $18 billion annually. More than 12.8 million school days are lost each year due to asthma, approximately 8 days for each student with asthma. This makes it very difficult for parents who may miss work because their child is home from school after an asthma flare-up.

There is no cure for asthma. Almost 4,000 people die each year from asthma-related conditions. The best course of action is to manage the disease by preventing symptoms and treating attacks when they occur. Improved care and management has the potential to not only save lives, but also to reduce the number of people suffering asthma attacks so they don't miss work or have to visit the emergency room or the hospital.

Our resolution also underscores the disparities in asthma based on race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status. It is important to work to improve asthma-related outcomes for all Americans, but particularly for those who are disproportionately affected by the disease.

Mr. Speaker, the resolution before us also focuses on allergy. This refers to reactions by the immune system when a person comes into contact with certain substances that act as triggers. Allergies are most often triggered by pollen. They can also be triggered by exposure to other substances like certain food or pets.

Like asthma, allergy is a common disease among Americans. Approximately 50 million Americans suffer from allergies. Approximately 3 million school-aged children have a food allergy. And the prevalence of allergy has increased across all age, sex, and racial groups in the last decade.

Symptoms of allergy also vary. And we understand this very well this time of year. The symptoms can be rather mild or for some people very severe. Hives and swelling of the throat and allergic reactions can be severe enough to cause death. So it's important to consider the impacts of allergy as an individual condition.

We must also not overlook the connection between allergy and asthma. Over 50 percent of asthma cases are triggered by allergens. Today's resolution gives us an opportunity to learn more about asthma and allergy and the impact of these conditions upon American families. It encourages local communities to raise awareness surrounding these diseases.

The resolution also recognizes and salutes the important work of health professionals who treat asthma-and allergy-related health issues. Finally, the resolution recognizes and affirms the Nation's commitment to education surrounding the care for these two conditions.

I urge my colleagues to support this resolution.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from the Energy and Commerce Committee, Mr. Terry, for his participation today. We're not going to repeal the health care reform law. It's too important to American families. We're going to make it work. And we're all in this together to make it work.

If you have asthma or if you have an allergy, the new health reform bill is very positive for you and your family because now no longer will health insurance companies be able to deny coverage based upon a preexisting condition. So if your child has a severe case of asthma, that health insurance company can no longer say, No, we're not going to cover that.

The new health reform law is good news for American families, especially those with asthma and allergies, because no longer will health insurance companies be able to cancel your policy just because you get sick. So if you have a health insurance policy and you come down with a severe case of asthma or your child does, under our law health insurance companies will no longer be able to cancel you because you have developed that condition. The same goes for breast cancer, the same goes for any terrible condition. And this is a real world solution for our families all across America.

More good news from the health care plan. There are many students in college these days that before they reached age 26 they were often left in the lurch. Now, under the health reform law we say that health insurance companies have to keep your kids on your policy until they turn age 26. There are plenty of young students today that are having a tough time finding a job, and this is an important lifeline for them.

I think we should also focus on our Medicare patients, because sometimes a condition like asthma gets a whole lot worse as someone ages. The good news under the health reform law is that Medicare patients will get free checkups and preventative care. So hopefully, if a chronic condition is developing, we can prevent it if they go in, and not have to worry about copayments anymore that are very expensive if you're on a fixed income. And you can get coverage that you need, the checkups and preventative care, whether it's asthma or allergies or some other serious condition.

I think it's probably going to help Medicare patients as well because some of them are spending a lot of money on their pharmaceuticals and drugs. So if you need those inhalers now and you're falling into the doughnut hole because you're spending a lot, we're going to be able to help you out for those seniors that are falling into that doughnut hole, meaning they are spending a lot on their drugs, whether it's asthma, allergies, or some other medication that they need.

So I am not sorry that this turned into a debate on health care. We're not going to repeal it. We're going to work together. Those are the values we share in America. We're going to make health reform work for American families, all of us. We're in this together. We don't need to waste time on repeal. We're going to dedicate ourselves, all of us, to making it work for American families.

Mr. Speaker, I would also like to urge my colleagues to support our designation of May as Asthma and Allergy Awareness Month. I urge my colleagues to support the resolution.

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

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.

Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.

I am, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, sometimes things are not as complex as we try to make them here in Washington. In fact, sometimes our best decisions come down to simple truths. One of those truths is that Americans are safer when our government fights to keep terrorists off U.S. soil rather than when it fights to bring them here.

Mr. Speaker, in January 2009, 17 months ago, the worst terrorists who had ever attacked the United States were on the verge of conviction in Guantanamo. The most experienced and best prosecutor the U.S. had against terrorists and a full prosecution team had been prosecuting these terrorists for almost 2 years. They had handled over 56 motions, countless hearings, and, according to them, would have had guilty pleas out of all five of the 9/11 defendants within 6 months; in other words, June a year ago.

But this administration issued an order 17 months ago that destroyed all the work that prosecutor had done, all the work his entire team had done, every motion they had won, done away with every hearing, for nothing, and forced us as a nation to begin this prosecution anew sometime, somewhere.

Today, 17 months later, there is not a single individual in this Chamber that has a clue as to when, where, how, or even if these terrorists will be prosecuted. All we know is that we are now 3\1/2\ more years down the road and the clock is still ticking while the Attorney General continues to debate whether we should prosecute them here or we should prosecute them there.

Now, while the victims of 9/11 have been waiting, the ACLU has not. They have moved forward with the John Adams Project to robustly defend these terrorists who, by the way, have admitted their guilt. And while the victims of 9/11 have been waiting, there are allegations that the identities of key military and intelligence personnel have been passed to the 9/11 defendants more than a year ago, and allegations that such passage could have come from the attorneys involved in the case. There are further allegations that the passage of this information could have been a criminal act and could have jeopardized the safety of some of the individuals involved.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, there have been concerns that the Secretary of Defense and the Attorney General have failed to timely and adequately investigate these matters.

So what is the difference between our motion to recommit and this bill? First, we say, enough is enough; try the terrorists in Guantanamo. And we therefore prohibit the transfer of the detainees to the United States. Simple, straightforward, no more wobbling.

The majority's position in the bill, Mr. Speaker, is that the President can continue to take all the time he wants to determine if, when, where, and how he will prosecute the terrorists and where he will house them until he does, and all he has to do is file a plan when and if he ultimately decides to do so.

Now, my good friend, the chairman of the committee, loves to tell us, just read the bill. Well, if you just read the bill, you will find that the bill prohibits the Department of Defense from spending any money to reinforce security or other facilities, but it does not stop them from coming. It just stops us from preparing for them to come.

Secondly, Mr. Speaker, this motion to recommit says that the inspector general shall investigate as to whether or not there has been a crime from any of these allegations of distributing this information about military personnel and intelligence personnel. The current bill only allows him to investigate matters within the Department of Defense.

This bill makes sure that if any crime has been committed, he can investigate it, but the bill gives two get-out-of-jail-free cards. If the Secretary of Defense or the Attorney General decides that this would impair or interfere with an investigation, they can stop it--the same Secretary of Defense who has punted the investigation for a year, the same Attorney General who has not prosecuted these terrorists.

Mr. Speaker, I would just say if the Attorney General won't prosecute the terrorists, he is not going to investigate the attorneys that are representing them.

Mr. Speaker, let me say this in conclusion. The bottom line is, we can't stop every terrorist from coming to the United States, but we can stop the ones that are coming from Guantanamo. This motion to recommit does that. We can't protect all of our military and intelligence personnel from terrorists, but we can help the ones involved in this case. And that is what this motion to recommit does.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I yield back my time.

Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

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

On behalf of the Republican side of the Energy and Commerce Committee, I rise in support of H. Res. 407, to support the designation of May as National Asthma and Allergy Awareness Month. About 50 million Americans suffer from allergies and around 20 million suffer from asthma. Of those 20 million asthma sufferers, over half have both allergies and asthma.

While it's rare, allergies and asthma attacks can be deadly. But even a more mild attack can keep a child home from school or a parent out of work. While allergies and asthma are often chronic conditions, they can be managed with medication. Inhalers, for instance, allow people with asthma to participate in sports, and a wide range of medications are available to those who suffer from allergies. In fact, my nephew Raymond played baseball all through his youth having to carry his inhaler.

Many of us rely on common, everyday over-the-counter medications to deal with allergies. Unfortunately, the health care bill will increase the cost of drugs to Americans because they will no longer get the benefit of untaxed dollars through their FSAs to purchase over-the- counter drugs for conditions like allergies. The actual cost to Americans for these medications will therefore increase, forcing them to go to prescription drug levels, and increasing the costs to health care. Additionally, the majority's health care bill will increase the costs or create a direct tax on inhalers and breathing devices.

Now, some might try to say that the savings really wasn't that great, and the benefit of this massive trillion-dollar government scheme will far outweigh the costs. But the fact is that Americans who suffer from chronic allergies and asthma have to purchase medications on a regular basis. Over time, savings from an FSA can add up. And it's kind of like how massive deficits year after year lead to a $13 trillion deficit. There may be some benefit to someone at some point in time from the President's health care bill, but in the meantime all the American people are getting is higher costs.

I support this resolution and urge Members to vote for it. However, I am opposed to some of the policies implemented by this Congress that would increase the cost of treatment for those with allergies and asthma.

Mr. Speaker, I understand the gentlelady is prepared to close, so at this

time I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Herger).

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

Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.

Yes, in its current form.

Mr. Speaker, I ask to be heard on the point of order.

Mr. Speaker, the motion to recommit proposes to add a new amendment to the bill freezing the rate of pay for ourselves, Members of Congress, and for the non-uniformed Federal employees. The amendment relies on the definition of civil service provided in title V of the United States Code which covers positions in the executive, the judicial, and the legislative branches.

The bill before us contains numerous and repeated references to title V of the United States Code, yet the gentleman makes the point of order that this amendment is not germane to the bill.

Mr. Speaker, the bill before us includes provisions, such as the recently adopted Sarbanes amendment, that affect the policies of all executive branch agencies, not just the Department of Defense. And on that basis, I believe that the Chair will find the provisions of the amendment limiting pay for civilian executive branch employees germane. I also believe that the bill is broad enough to cover judicial employees as well.

So, Mr. Speaker, that then leaves the question of ourselves, our pay, and that of non-uniformed Federal employees, legislative branch employees. So, therefore, Mr. Speaker, I believe it would be improper for the Chair to use a point of order for the purpose of protecting the employees of the legislative branch and for the purpose of protecting and shielding us Members of Congress from the pay freeze herein being proposed. And it would otherwise be in order for employees of the executive branch.

And so, Mr. Speaker, I ask the question: Do we really want to go on record saying that the rules of this House should not be used to shield our own Members of Congress' salaries and also those of the legislative salaries of the non-uniformed branch from being fiscally irresponsible?

So, Mr. Speaker, I urge you not to sustain the point of order because when the average wage and benefit package of government workers is double that of private employees, then we should not use--

I am speaking on the point of order, Mr. Speaker.

Yes, Mr. Speaker.

We should not use the arcane rules to somehow exempt ourselves as a Member of Congress from our own pay increases and that of the non- uniformed Federal offices under the responsibility of tightening our belt.

Mr. Speaker, I appeal the ruling of the Chair.

Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this resolution. However, I find it interesting that we are discussing the hardships faced by those with allergies and asthma, when just over 2 months ago the Democrats rammed through a health care law that will prohibit Americans from using pretax dollars to buy over-the-counter allergy medicines and impose harsh new taxes on prescription drugs used in asthma inhalers.

Beginning next year, the Democrats' health care overhaul will prohibit the 45 million Americans with flexible spending arrangements and health savings accounts from using this money to purchase over-the- counter drugs like Claritin or Zyrtec. This amounts to a $5 billion tax increase. Those with asthma will soon see their out-of-pocket costs increase because the Democrats' health overhaul imposes a $27 billion tax on drug manufacturers, including those who make inhalation drugs. Mr. Speaker, that's nothing to sneeze about. The Medicare actuaries expect this, quote, ``tax would generally be passed through to health consumers in the form of higher drug prices.''

Mr. Speaker, it's time to repeal the Democrats' health law and replace it with commonsense reforms that actually lower health care costs, not raise them.