Honoring the lives of the brave soldiers and civilians of the United States Army who died or were wounded in the tragic attack of November 5, 2009, at Fort Hood, Texas.

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

(Mr. DREIER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I begin by thanking my good friend from Rochester, the distinguished Chair of the Committee on Rules, Ms. Slaughter, for yielding me the customary 30 minutes. And I congratulate her and all of our colleagues on their membership in the 111th Congress.

As we have heard from the speeches delivered by the Speaker and the Republican leader, today marks the start of the 111th Congress, a new beginning for the first branch and for the people's House.

As was stated, 2 weeks from today we are going to be making history with the inauguration of Barack Obama. President-elect Obama has already reached out to congressional Republicans, expressing his desire to work with us in this new Congress.

We all know very well what an honorable campaign Mr. Obama ran. While I didn't support his candidacy, I, like many of my colleagues and fellow Americans, was inspired by his message of hope, unity, and change for the future.

He laid out a vision that replaces bitterness with bipartisanship, cynicism with a sincere commitment to a brighter future.

Of course, there is a great divergence of opinion on the details of exactly how we reach that brighter future. Congressional Republicans have our agenda. We feel very strongly about it. We are committed more than ever to the principles for which we stand. But we wholeheartedly agree with Mr. Obama that the way forward is through open, inclusive debate, a strong spirit of bipartisanship and the sincere pursuit of common ground.

Unfortunately, the high-minded rhetoric of the Presidential campaign only highlights the pure cynicism of this rules package that we are considering today. The Democratic leadership of this House is poised to consider, as its very first legislative act of this Congress, a rules package that literally shreds the Obama vision.

I am going to repeat that, Mr. Speaker. The package that we are going to be voting on today literally shreds the Obama vision. Fourteen days before he is even inaugurated into office, the President-elect's plan for unity and bipartisanship is being obstructed by his own party.

This rules package takes the abysmal record of the last Congress and actually makes it more restrictive. You will hear a lot today about arcane procedural tactics and wonder how it has any relevance to the problems that we face as a nation. But these changes, Mr. Speaker, have enormous consequences for the conduct and outcome of our policy debates.

Mr. Speaker, process is substance. As we tackle enormously important issues like, as everyone has said, getting our economy back on track, we cannot achieve a good outcome without a good process. We are very attuned to the concept of history being made right now and 2 weeks from today, so perhaps we should look at history.

The motion to recommit, as we know it today, was granted to the minority 100 years ago following a rebellion against the most dictatorial Speaker of the last century, Joseph Gurney ``Uncle Joe'' Cannon. This motion ensures that the minority gets at least one opportunity, one opportunity to offer an amendment or an alternative. During the Democrats' 40-year reign, they routinely denied Republicans, often dozens of times in a Congress, the single bite at the apple, one opportunity to offer an alternative. Mr. Speaker, when we took the majority in 1995, we guaranteed the right of the motion to recommit, and we never, we never denied it.

This body has always been governed by majority rule. The majority has a number of tools at its disposal, not least of which is the Rules Committee itself, on which I am privileged to serve. That's how they advance their agenda. An effective majority can abide by the rules and traditions of the House and still succeed legislatively.

By contrast, in the 110th Congress, the Democratic leadership chose, instead, to resort to procedural gimmickry to advance their agenda. They had every legislative advantage as the majority party, and yet they felt compelled to trample the traditions of the House, rather than build consensus or engage in actual deliberation. They went so far as to shut down the appropriations process to avoid open debate. Mr. Speaker, as for the motion to recommit, that one single opportunity, that one single opportunity for minority input, the Democratic leadership

frequently resorted to legislative tricks to deny it.

Now, the Democratic leadership is no longer content to shut down debate on an ad hoc basis. They are making it official with this rules package. The underlying resolution contains a host of new procedural gimmicks to stifle debate and to perpetuate partisanship. This resolution changes the rules of the House to formally limit, to formally limit, the motion to recommit. This limitation prevents any bill from being returned to committee for further deliberation. It restricts Members' ability to strip out tax increases. Apparently, the Democratic majority believes tax increases are sacred, but open debate is not sacred.

This rules package also manipulates our budget rules, once again, to protect tax increases, as well as to protect spending increases. You see, Mr. Speaker, the Democratic leadership not only spent the last Congress shutting out Republicans, they also had to find clever ways to shut out fiscally conservative Democrats. Trying to build consensus within their own party was very time consuming. They learned their lesson, though. This rules package guts the budget rules that many Democrats hold so dear.

The laundry list of rules changes goes on. They cut term limits for committee chairmen, they scrap Medicare cost-containment measures. And if all this weren't enough, they include completely closed rules, completely closed rules for the two bills that will be considered later this week without ever having the Rules Committee meet. Apparently, the Democratic leadership scoured the House rules for accountability and transparency measures and systematically dismantled what they found.

So much, Mr. Speaker, for the Obama vision. While he is calling for the most transparent administration in our Nation's history, his congressional Democrats are launching the most closed Congress in history.

But I believe that President-elect Obama is sincere. Since the day he was elected, he has been reaching out to Republicans. He has called many of us individually to express a sincere desire to move beyond the divisiveness of politics and to work together. I can only imagine the chagrin at his own party, their attempt to undermine his best efforts. Today's rules package is a huge step backward. It sets the stage for even more closed, bitter, rancorous debate.

The next major item on the agenda is more than a $1 trillion stimulus package. Republican Leader John Boehner has laid out several modest, but critically important, requests for an open process. There should be public hearings. The text should be available online for a full week prior to a vote. There should be no special-interest earmarks.

These are commonsense guidelines that are widely supported by the American people. They understand that our response to the economic crisis is too important to allow it to be slapped together in secret behind closed doors and rammed through the House. Both Democrats and Republicans have a number of good ideas that should be considered and debated.

Today I will be pursuing an economic recovery package that focuses on pro-growth policies. I am introducing a trio of bills aimed at growing our economy by simplifying and reducing the tax burden on individuals and job creators, jump-starting our housing market and reviving the auto industry.

I hope we can move forward on these kinds of policies, but neither I nor my colleagues ask to prejudge the outcome of those debates. We simply ask that that debate take place.

Majority Leader Hoyer agrees, and said so on an interview that he had this past Sunday. We can only hope he is able to convince the Speaker to keep the process open and transparent. If her leadership's first legislative act of this Congress is any indication, it won't be a fruitful endeavor.

Mr. Speaker, today's new beginning is nothing more than a new low for the Democratic majority. Their cynicism and manipulation is all the more dismal against the backdrop of President-elect Obama's vision for hope, unity and change for the better. The Democratic majority's actions today do not represent change that fulfills hope. This is change that denies hope.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to oppose this rules package.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield 2 minutes to my good friend from Miami, the hardworking member of the Committee on Rules, Mr. Diaz-Balart.

I will say as I do that, Mr. Speaker, that we would never have contemplated denying the then-minority what is being denied us under this measure.

Will the gentlewoman yield?

Mr. Speaker, let me just say that the spirit of the debate here, refusal to yield, is indicative of exactly what this rules package consists of.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield 2 minutes to our very good friend from Springfield, Missouri (Mr. Blunt).

Mr. Speaker, at this time I am happy to yield 2 minutes to my good friend from Richmond, Virginia (Mr. Cantor), the distinguished Republican whip.

Mr. Speaker, at this time I am happy to yield 2 minutes to our very good friend from Menomonee Falls, Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner).

Mr. Speaker, at this time I am happy to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Columbus, Indiana (Mr. Pence), the Chair of the Republican Conference.

(Mr. PENCE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, may I inquire of the gentlewoman how many speakers she has remaining on her side, and how much time is remaining on both sides for this debate?

At this time, I am happy to yield 2 minutes to my friend from San Antonio, Mr. Smith.

Mr. Speaker, at this time I am happy to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Chester Springs, Pennsylvania (Mr. Gerlach).

Mr. Speaker, at this time, I'd like to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Roanoke, Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte).

(Mr. GOODLATTE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, at this time, let me just inquire of the Chair how much time is remaining.

At this time I am happy to yield 1 minute to our great, relatively new Member from New Orleans (Mr. Scalise).

Mr. Speaker, I would just like to say that it doesn't appear that we have any other speakers on our side.

Is the gentlewoman prepared to close debate on hers?

I yield myself the balance of the time.

Mr. Speaker, we've had a fascinating debate here. I've repeatedly asked my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to yield to me so that we could engage in an exchange on this, and no one chose to yield to me at all, indicating exactly what this rules package is all about. We've repeatedly had academics quoted here over the past hour about the use of ``promptly'' and the fact that it kills legislation. Time and time again from the Chair, the Speaker of the House has ruled that a measure that is recommitted to a committee promptly is not killing the bill. Until the Chair says that, it is not killing the bill.

We know that the last Congress was the single-most restrictive, closed Congress in the history of the Republic, and it is very, very sad to have this sacrosanct right being obliterated that is granted to the minority, as Thomas Jefferson outlined in his manual, talking about the procedures and the rights that the minority should have. It is outrageous in the wake of Barack Obama's pledge to the American people that he wanted to have greater transparency and accountability.

Now, Mr. Speaker, at the conclusion of this debate on the package, I'll be offering a motion to commit, which could be the majority's last opportunity to freely decide the form of the motion to recommit. Included in the motion will be an amendment. This amendment is the minority's attempt to restore some of the Obama vision of openness, inclusiveness and transparency to the underlying rules package.

First, it would restore the motion to recommit, which I've discussed. It is an important tool that ensures that the minority gets at least one chance, one bite at the apple, so that 100 million Americans represented by Members of the minority here can be heard.

Second, it would restore term limits for committee chairmanships.

Third, it would change committee membership ratios so that all committees, except the Rules and Ethics Committees, reflect the ratio of Democrats and Republicans in the House. This would help to ensure that the 100 million Americans, as I said, who are represented by Republicans would have some kind of say in this process.

Fourth and finally, it would require that all committee votes be available online within 48 hours, a proposal from the Republican Study Committee.

At the end of the last Congress, the Appropriations Committee filed reports on bills that had been ordered reported months before. The public should not have to wait to know how their Member voted in committee while committee chairmen dragged their feet. These four improvements are about nothing more than exactly what Barack Obama talked about--transparency, accountability and fairness.

Today's historic rules package rolls back reforms made a century ago this month by a bipartisan working group of Members rising against the repressive rule of Speaker Joe Cannon. Two of the reforms that were codified during that historic revolt on opening day in 1909 were a motion of recommittal for the minority party and an increased threshold to set aside Calendar Wednesday. Ironically, we find ourselves here in the same well 100 years

later, fighting to maintain these simple rights and guarantees which have for a century, Mr. Speaker, safeguarded this House from the rise of another tyrannical Speaker.

So it is in that light that I ask Members to join me in supporting the motion to commit. Let us not undo what has been done. Let us learn from our past. Let us move forward with the hope and comity inspired by Barack Obama. Let's show the world that, in this House, the democratic process is alive and well no matter how large the majority. Vote ``yes'' on the motion to commit.

With that, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to commit.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the bill.

Mr. Speaker, this bill, H.R. 3962, does not represent good public policy. I rise to express my concerns about H.R. 3962, the Affordable Health Care for America Act.

This legislation is misnamed, as even the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office says it will not be affordable for the American people and our nation as a whole.

The Congressional Budget Office says this legislation will cost $1.055 trillion over the next 10 years, raising taxes on American taxpayers and businesses by $729.5 billion. Of great concern to me, and the 138,647 Medicare beneficiaries I represent, is that it will also cut Medicare payments by $500 billion. There is no possible way you can cut such a significant amount of funding out of a program that is so vital to senior citizens without compromising the availability or quality of their care and without disrupting the relationship they have with their current doctors and medical providers.

Within the Medicare program, H.R. 3962 also cuts the reimbursement rate for seniors enrolled in Medicare Advantage programs. In the 10th Congressional District of Florida which I represent, more than one- third of the Medicare beneficiaries, or 47,729 seniors, are currently enrolled in Medicare Advantage plans. The Chief Actuary of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services estimates that if enacted, the legislation we consider today would cut enrollment in Medicare Advantage by 64 percent over 4 years. This means that more than 30,500 of the seniors I represent will lose or have to give up the health care coverage they currently have and like. This violates the number one promise made by the sponsors of this legislation, who say that if you like your current health care coverage, you can keep it.

The Congressional Budget Office also notes that changes in this legislation to the Medicare Part D program will, in the end, drive up Part D premiums by as much as 20 percent. These are additional premiums that seniors living on fixed incomes will have to pay to keep their prescription drug coverage.

Finally, with regard to Medicare, this legislation does nothing to correct a 21 percent cut in physician reimbursement rates that is scheduled to take effect January 1st for doctors who provide care to our seniors. Having met with doctors I represent throughout the past year, I know that one of their major concerns about health care reform is that they will be asked to take larger and larger cuts in Medicare reimbursement rates. These cuts, they say, will make it more and more difficult for them to care for Medicare patients. In the end, many seniors could be forced to find new doctors.

In addition to the impact this legislation would have on senior citizens, I am concerned about the economic impact this legislation will have on those seniors, their children, their grandchildren, and their great grandchildren. H.R. 3962 creates a brand new federal entitlement program at a time when our nation is struggling to sustain those entitlement programs already on the books. While the Congressional Budget Office says that under a best case scenario the $500 billion in Medicare cuts and $729.5 billion in tax increases will pay for this legislation over its first 10 years if there are no unexpected costs, it is doubtful that this will keep the program from running up federal deficits after that and leaves no margin for error.

In fact, despite one of the goals of this legislation to make health insurance more available and affordable for uninsured Americans, we simply move an estimated 18 million people into the government Medicaid program. This is more than half of the 34 million uninsured

Americans who the Chief Actuary of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services says will receive coverage under this legislation.

Of the 13 million uninsured Americans who will receive coverage under the Health Insurance Exchange program created in this legislation, the Chief Actuary estimates that 40 percent, or 5.2 million, will take advantage of the government subsidized public option created by H.R. 3962.

The creation of a government subsidized public option is another major concern of the large majority of my constituents who have called and written me in opposition to this legislation. We are concerned about the insertion of the federal government into the precious patient-doctor relationship. At last count, this 1,990 page bill creates more than 100 new boards, bureaucracies, commissions and programs. Among those created by the bill is the ``Health Benefits Advisory Committee,'' that would be chaired by the U.S. Surgeon General, to make recommendations on cost and coverage issues.

This 27-member government committee of unelected administrators will be in charge of advising other bureaucrats, who will then decide what procedures American citizens are allowed to have and what doctors you are allowed to see under your healthcare plan. This places another layer of bureaucracy between you and your doctor.

This committee is in addition to another newly created federal organization called the ``Health Choices Administration,'' which will be governed by a new Commissioner who will distribute billions of dollars of taxpayer-funded subsidies. Additionally, the Commissioner will have complete control over all insurance plans offered through the newly created Health Insurance Exchange.

Perhaps the toughest of the mandates handed down by the federal government under this legislation is that businesses must provide health care for their employees or pay an 8 percent payroll tax and that individuals must purchase health insurance or pay a 2.5 percent tax on their adjusted gross income. This is not the federal government providing incentives to individuals or employers. This is the federal government imposing its will on individuals and businesses, and penalizing those who do not comply.

This legislation further penalizes small businesses by imposing a 5.4 percent surtax on individuals earning more than $500,000. Half of these so-called ``high earners'' are small business owners. Just imagine how small business owners all across our nation will react to this $544 billion in new federal taxes they will pay over the next 10 years. With the unemployment rate nationally at 10.2 percent and 11.4 percent in Florida, Congress should not be making it harder for business owners to create new jobs.

Finally, at a time when we are trying to lower health care costs, this legislation imposes a new 2.5 percent excise tax on the cost of wheelchairs, portable oxygen systems, diabetes testing equipment, and a whole range of other medical devices. This tax will be paid by our constituents who have no choice but to purchase this medical equipment and who may already be stretched thin by other medical costs.

Mr. Speaker, I have discussed here some of my concerns about provisions in this bill; however there are glaring omissions to this legislation as well. The most significant provision that has been left out is medical liability reform. This is a top issue for doctors, hospitals and all medical providers, as it is one of the major drivers increasing the cost of health care. Tort reform would help reduce the filing of unwarranted lawsuits, decrease the number of duplicative tests that are a part of defensive medicine, and lower the cost of medical malpractice insurance rates, which would translate in lower medical costs.

Tort reform is one of the many areas that we can and should be able to agree upon to increase the availability and decrease the cost of health care. There are others I support, some in this bill, including requiring coverage for individuals with pre-existing conditions, preventing insurance companies from cancelling the policies of individuals when they become sick, providing for the availability of health insurance across state lines, ensuring that employees can retain access to health insurance when they change or lose their jobs, creating health insurance pools that small business owners and self- employed individuals can join to provide lower cost health insurance for their employees and themselves, and closing the so-called doughnut hole in the Medicare Part D prescription drug program.

Mr. Speaker, there is no doubt that our nation can and should do better to provide quality and affordable health care for the American people. Throughout my service in Congress, I have done all I could to expand health care opportunities nationally and throughout the 10th Congressional District, which I represent.

By establishing the National Marrow Donor Program in 1986, I sought to provide life-saving medical options to terminally ill patients suffering from leukemia and more than 60 otherwise fatal blood disorders. Today the national registry has more than 7 million volunteers available to donate the life-saving bone marrow.

During the time that I worked to establish the national registry and as we began to find matched marrow donors for patients, I met with family after family who needed help convincing health insurance companies to cover the marrow transplant procedure. From this experience, I witnessed first-hand the tragedy of families losing their health insurance coverage at their time of greatest need and of being denied coverage for a life-saving procedure.

In a similar manner, I have identified other national and local health care needs and have done something to solve the problems that include increasing the vaccination rates for our nation's children; ensuring the availability of specialized services, facilities and equipment at our nation's hospital emergency rooms to meet the needs of children; expanding the funding for graduate medical education programs to increase the number of doctors who receive the next step of their training; increasing the Inspector General force at federal agencies to uncover waste, fraud and abuse which threaten the safety of seniors and veterans, and divert limited federal health care resources; improving the quality of health care through our investment in biomedical research by doubling the budget for the National Institutes of Health during my 6 years as Chairman of the Appropriations Committee; expanding other research opportunities through the Department of Defense in the areas of breast cancer, prostate cancer, Parkinson's Disease, ALS, multiple sclerosis and diabetes; and expanding the number of community health centers throughout Florida and Pinellas County.

Mr. Speaker, I take a back seat to no one when it comes to my work to improve and expand the quality and availability of health care for the American people and the people I represent. I supported the creation and expansion of the State Children's Insurance Program, which increases access to health care for our nation's youth, and likewise the Family and Medical Leave Act, allowing employees to take time off from work to care for a sick and recovering family member.

However, I cannot support legislation that would threaten the sanctity of the patient-doctor relationship, that would establish new federal bureaucracies that would insert themselves into the health care programs of individuals and employers, that creates a new and financially unsustainable federal entitlement program, that threatens the availability of health care for our nation's seniors, that raises taxes substantially and threatens the viability of many small businesses at a time when we are trying to get our nation's economy back on track, and that ultimately will not make health care insurance more affordable for the American people.

We have all heard from the American people we represent over the past few months that this legislation has been under consideration. We have heard that they are closely following its progress. We have heard that they have many concerns about this legislation before us. And we have heard that they want us to work together in a bipartisan manner to bring down the cost and expand the availability of health care coverage.

Today, we have a historic opportunity to tell the American people we hear their voices. We can commit to them that, on this issue which will affect every single household and business in our nation, we will go back to our respective committees and work together--as Republicans and Democrats; conservatives, moderates and liberals; Blue Dogs and Progressives--to come up with a solution that the American people can support and, most importantly, have confidence knowing it will do the job without bankrupting our nation, jeopardizing our economic recovery and violating the free market principles upon which our nation was founded.

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

I want to begin by thanking the gentleman from Maryland for his statement and yielding me the time to present the opening day's rules package for the 111th Congress.

Mr. Speaker, rarely has our great Nation faced such grave challenges. Millions of Americans are without jobs and consequently also without health insurance. Our troops are fighting two wars overseas. And as our economy spirals downward, Americans from coast to coast are struggling to make ends meet.

But there is reason to hope. In fewer than 14 days, a new President will be sworn in. And President-elect Barack Obama, the House Democrats and I, and my Republican friends are committed to rolling up our sleeves and getting to work immediately to solve the critical challenges that face our Nation.

On this day I am honored to address the House at the beginning of the 111th Congress to present the rules package that will govern this body as we work to meet the needs of American families over the next 2 years.

It is the responsibility of the majority to protect and enhance the integrity of the institution, and that is what this rules package does. Through building upon the important rules changes that Democrats implemented during the last Congress, we are keeping our commitment to the American people to restore accountability and honesty to government.

In the 110th Congress, Democrats put forth critical measures to restore transparency to the House. We banned gifts from lobbyists. We prohibited the use of corporate jets. We mandated ethics training for all House employees. We ensured transparency for earmarks by requiring the full disclosure of earmarks in all bills and conference reports. We established an independent Office of Congressional Ethics. And today we are building on our commitment to the American people to further strengthen the integrity of this institution in the 111th Congress.

By closing the loophole that allowed ``lame duck'' Members to negotiate employment contracts in secret, we are opening the doors of Congress and shedding light upon the process. By codifying the additional earmark reforms adopted mid-term in the 110th Congress, coupled with the ongoing rules that required the Members' signatures and their reasons for their requests, we are permanently strengthening earlier comprehensive reforms,

resulting in even further transparency and accountability in the earmark process.

By making commonsense changes to the motion to recommit, we are helping Congress to function more effectively while preserving the minority's legitimate right to present their policy alternatives through offering a motion that amends the bill or a ``straight'' motion that sends the bill back to committee without amendment.

By removing reference to term limits for committee Chairs from this package, we take away what was from the first a political consideration to eliminate that from the official House rules where they don't belong. And by maintaining strong PAYGO rules, we are demonstrating our strong commitment to fiscal discipline.

These important measures make good sense to protect the integrity of this institution and to enable Congress to help America get back on track. Today, we are not only harnessing the belief that we can continue to restore integrity and accountability to Congress, we are also laying down a strong foundation for House action on the grave challenges that face this great Nation.

Mr. Speaker and my friends on both sides of the aisle, the American people know exactly what's at stake over the next few years, which is why they have resoundingly raised their voices for change, and Democrats are listening. We are ready to help put Americans back to work by investing in job creation initiatives, strengthening our economy. We are ready to fix our broken health care system so that every citizen can get quality, affordable health care that they desperately need and are entitled to. We are ready to cultivate a clean energy economy by turning wind into energy, energy investments into innovation, and innovation into good-paying American jobs.

We are ready to begin responsibly withdrawing troops from Iraq, ready to ensure quality education for our young people, ready to continue making the tough choices that the American people elected us to make.

Yet in order for us to begin addressing these pressing challenges, we must ensure that Congress continues to put integrity and accountability at the heart of our daily actions. I can think of no better way to do that than by adopting these amendments to the House rules.

Mr. Speaker, it will be a long and difficult journey to strengthen our economy, to reform the health care system, and create a clean energy future worthy of our children and grandchildren. But the rules package before us today is an important first step, one that will ensure integrity in Congress as we move forward on this pivotal path.

It is time to reinvigorate America. It's time to make history. And let us begin.

Mr. Speaker, I urge adoption of this commonsense rules package to allow the House to operate more effectively and productively in solving the challenges facing our great Nation while strengthening our integrity in Congress.

Section-by-Section of Rule Changes--111th Congress

The changes in the standing rules of the House made by

House Resolution 5 include the following:

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 5 minutes to the vice chair of the Rules Committee, the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern).

(Mr. McGOVERN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Castor).

Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank), the chair of the Financial Services Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve my time.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank).

Mr. Speaker, please let me yield myself 1 or 2 minutes. One minute, I think, would be sufficient. I hadn't planned to do this, but I think the Record requires it.

I want to quote from three of our Republican Members for whom I have great affection and an awful lot of respect. The first one, Representative Tom Davis, who is not with us this year, stated the minority's intent to use ``promptly'' motions to kill legislation during debate on a motion to recommit H.R. 1433, the District of Columbia House Voting Rights Act. And let me quote him: ``Let me just say to my colleagues, I think the gun ban in the District is ridiculous, and would join my colleagues in overturning it. The problem is this motion doesn't do that. Instead of bringing it back to the floor forthwith for a vote and send it to the Senate, it simply sends it back to the committee, essentially killing it.''

Representative Joe Barton of Texas likened motions to recommit promptly to gimmicks during debate on H.R. 3693, the Children's Health Insurance Program: ``I will tell my friends on the majority side, it's not going to be a gimmick. I think it will say forthwith, which means if we adopt it, we vote on it.''

I yield myself 30 seconds.

During the debate on Representative Paul Ryan's motion to recommit on H.R. 5501, the Lantos-Hyde HIV/AIDS Act of 2008, Mr. Ryan acknowledged that ``promptly'' motions are intended to kill bills. ``This recommit motion is not intended to kill the bill. This is a forthwith recommit,'' he said.

I will reserve the balance of my time.

I don't have any further requests for time, or at least not from anybody who is presently on the floor, so I will reserve to close.

I reserve.

Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve.

I am.

Mr. Speaker, without any question, all of us who serve in this House love it. We understand our responsibilities to our constituents as well as to this institution. I want to make it absolutely clear, unequivocally clear, that no intention here today is to in any way impede the minority rights. We will defend them to the death.

But we would have to be Alice in Wonderland, saying that she would be able to believe six impossible things before breakfast, if we gave serious thought for one moment to the possibility that a motion to recommit promptly is anything other than a way to kill a bill.

What we are trying to do here is to expedite the process to get the Obama agenda, which apparently we are in solid agreement on, moved forward because the American people are crying out for it. It must be done. We want to do this fairly. We want to do this equitably. I hope we can do it with minds that meet on all of these subjects, but we must remove some of the gimmicks which have done nothing but subvert the will of the House.

So I am really happy to close with this. I hope that everybody in the House--all of the new Members whom I congratulate, people who have been here for some time and those of us who have been moderately here for a long time--will all, please, get together today. There is nothing in here that hurts anyone. We are simply attempting to move forward the business of the United States of America for which we swore an oath not an hour ago.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

The previous question was ordered.

Motion to Commit

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 903, I call up the bill (H.R. 3962) to provide affordable, quality health care for all Americans and reduce the growth in health care spending, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to start off the debate by recognizing our very distinguished majority leader, Steny Hoyer from the State of Maryland, for 1 minute.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased at this time to yield 3 minutes to the majority whip of the House of Representatives, Mr. Clyburn.

Mr. Speaker, at this time I am very pleased to recognize and to yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro).

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased now to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Larson), the chairman of the Democratic Caucus.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased at this time to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from the State of Maryland, Mr. Chris Van Hollen.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 3 minutes.

Today, we have a historic opportunity. Sixty-five years after Franklin Roosevelt and Social Security and 35 years after Medicare, we have an opportunity, under the leadership of President Obama and Speaker Pelosi, to reform our health care system and at last provide coverage to all Americans.

We know that health insurance today is failing our families and our economy. If we do nothing, the system will go bankrupt, premiums will keep skyrocketing, benefits will be slashed, what you get will cost more, and the deficit will increase by billions of dollars.

Today, Americans with health insurance know that they are one serious illness away from debt and bankruptcy, and millions of Americans have no insurance at all. With this legislation, we can fix these problems.

First and foremost, this bill provides health insurance security for all Americans. If you have health insurance today, you can keep it; you keep your doctor and your other health providers. But if you lose your job, you will not lose your health insurance. If you have a preexisting medical condition, you cannot be denied health insurance. If you have a serious illness, we remove the cap insurance companies have imposed on paying for treatments over your lifetime. Effective immediately, it will be illegal for insurance companies to put lifetime caps on your coverage. And children all the way up to age 27 can continue on their parents' policies.

Our bill has historic reforms. It expands coverage and reduces costs. It trains doctors and supports community health centers. It provides a public health insurance option that will give Americans more choice and competition.

Our legislation strengthens Medicare. We will eliminate copayments for preventive services. We close and then eliminate the doughnut hole that makes prescription drugs unaffordable for so many of our seniors.

And this legislation is affordable. The only thing not affordable is to do nothing. The legislation is fully paid for. It will not add to the deficit over the next two decades.

Today, we have the chance of a lifetime to do something great and momentous for the American people. By passing this bill, we can reform health insurance in America and provide all Americans with the security of knowing that when they get sick, care will be available and affordable.

I urge all my colleagues to support this bill.

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

If the gentleman would yield.

As the gentleman well knows, the decision is not up to one person; it will be up to the conferees. The conferees will have to be meeting with the Senate conferees and going over a number of positions.

If this amendment is adopted by the House, it will be the House position as we go into conference. We will have to discuss it further, and then we will see what will be the result. But no guarantee can be made by me or any other Member at this time.

There will be an opportunity, as you know, to instruct the conferees, which reinforces, of course, a particular part of the House bill.

Mr. Speaker, at this time, I am honored to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone), the chairman of the Health Subcommittee of the Energy and Commerce Committee.

Mr. Speaker, this bill reflects the input and the inspiration of two Kennedys in the Congress of the United States, certainly Senator Ted Kennedy, but also Patrick Kennedy, who has been such a leader in the areas of mental health and addiction.

I yield to the gentleman from Rhode Island for a unanimous consent request.

(Mr. KENNEDY asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on H.R. 3962 and include extraneous material in the Record.

Mr. Speaker, at this point, I am greatly honored to yield 3 minutes to the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, one of the crafters of this bill and one of the great leaders in health care as well as other policy areas, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel).

(Mr. RANGEL asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California, Anna Eshoo.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to a member of our committee, the gentleman from New York, Eliot Engel.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to a member of our committee, the gentleman from Texas, Gene Green.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to a very active and important member of the Health Subcommittee and of the full Energy and Commerce Committee, my colleague from California, Lois Capps.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Doyle).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from the

State of Washington, a very important member of the Energy and Commerce Committee, Mr. Inslee.

Congressman Inslee, you are correct. It's our intent that the patient would not be switched from a referenced product to a non- interchangeable biosimilar without approval from the doctor.

I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

Our intent is also that a patient could not be financially induced by their plan to switch to a non-interchangeable biosimilar without the consent of their doctor, and I am happy to work with the gentleman to clarify the language in conference.

Mr. Speaker, at this time I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from the State of North Carolina, an important member of our committee, Mr. Butterfield.

Mr. Speaker, I yield for the purpose of a colloquy to the chairman of the subcommittee, Mr. Pallone, 1 minute.

I want to thank the gentleman from New Jersey for his leadership on the bill before us today and for his tireless efforts on behalf of low-income Americans who need long-term care. I support the elimination of barriers to the provision of home and community-based services under Medicaid, a result that the gentleman's Empowered at Home Act would achieve.

I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

I will continue to work with you and other Members to enact legislation that gives State Medicaid programs a robust option for offering low-income Americans the choice of receiving long-term care services in the community rather than in a nursing home.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to a very important member of our committee, the gentlewoman from the Virgin Islands (Mrs. Christensen).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky), a senior member of the Energy and Commerce Committee.

Mr. Speaker, can I inquire how much time is available on each side?

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Baldwin).

I thank Mr. Waxman for yielding.

Our rule was chaired by John Dingell, himself a historic figure on a historic day.

I want to congratulate all of those who have participated in the accomplishment of the product that we consider this day: Mr. Waxman, one of our senior Members in the House; Mr. Rangel, one of our senior Members in the House; and Mr. Miller.

I want to thank too the Republicans who engaged in this discussion, in this debate, because it is historic, and all of us who sit in this Chamber know that it will have a great effect on our people. Some perceive that effect as not positive. More, I believe, think it is positive. In any event, none of us believe that it is not extraordinarily important.

Soon each one of us is going to look into his or her conscience and vote on this bill. And when the time comes, I don't know if any words of mine will sway any of you. But I know that the most powerful arguments for the bill won't be spoken on this floor. They are being lived right now in our country in every one of our districts, in every one of our towns and counties and municipalities.

In the anxiety of the family that finds itself paying more and more each year for health insurance that grows weaker and weaker.

In the frustration of the small business owner weighing the choices of dropping her employees' coverage against the threat of being driven out of business by her competitors.

And in the fury of the patient who learns that an insurance company bureaucrat has deemed him too sick for the coverage he paid for.

They are our families, our neighbors, our fellow citizens. They are waiting for health insurance reform that is more affordable, more secure, more just. Their stories will be with me and I know with each of us when we cast our vote.

Because I want to say to every American facing down illness: never again, never again will you be denied coverage because you have diabetes or asthma or some other disease or because you're pregnant or because you have anything else your insurer decides is a preexisting condition. Never again will your coverage run out. Nor will you find the coverage you thought you had paid for was actually not there at all. And never again can insurance companies drive out competition and set premiums as high as they like, because there will be a public insurance option and a transparent marketplace to keep them honest, to keep them competitive, to bring prices down.

I want to say to our middle class families, the backbone of our country: you will have coverage that you can depend upon. Even if you change your job or lose your job or decide to start a business, you will be able to find affordable coverage in a competitive marketplace, an insurance exchange that offers you a choice of good policies at fair rates. In fact, according to an MIT analysis, buying coverage on the exchange will bring your premiums down by a great deal, even without the affordability credits.

If your family makes $90,000 or more, you'll save more than 1,200 bucks. If your family makes $60,000, you'll save more than $5,000. And if your family is making $38,000, you'll save more than $9,000. That's the kind of tax cut that America needs to secure its medical future.

I want to say to our seniors: you can count on Medicare, on a Federal program, for dignity and peace of mind in your golden years. And that will not change. Today we will vote to protect your access to your doctor, to encourage Medicare physicians to cooperate on higher quality care, to keep your Medicare solvent for longer, and to bring an end to the doughnut hole that leaves prescription drugs unaffordable for so many.

I want to say to our small businessmen and women: I know your premiums keep going up and that each year they make it harder to stay in business, to compete with Big Business and with foreign firms. You deserve a fair playing field; and in the insurance exchange marketplace, you'll be able to buy coverage at the low group rates you're now being denied.

I want to say to the 35 million Americans without insurance, who are forced to skip checkups and preventative care, who are forced to turn to the ER as the first and only line of defense, who live sicker and shorter lives: you will have what every man, woman, and child has in every other industrialized country in the world: health coverage you can afford and that you can count on.

And every American who is rightly worried about our mounting deficits and debt, I can tell you this: this bill does not add to the deficit over the next 10 years or the 10 years thereafter. This bill means health care that is more fiscally sustainable for years to come.

That is what this bill, the Affordable Health Care for America Act, can achieve for our country and for our people. It isn't a simple bill. It isn't a perfect bill, but it is the product of months and months of careful debate, sometimes animated debate, yes, even angry debate, careful scrutiny, hard work, and citizen input. And it's the right response to this time of economic insecurity in which we have been called to lead.

If we miss this chance, or if we vote for a Republican plan that does very little to expand coverage, weakens insurance, frankly, for millions who have it, and continues to allow millions of Americans to be denied affordable coverage, we'll find ourselves back here again.

But by then, premiums will eat up even more of our families' budgets; health care will consume even more of our economy; and even more Americans will have died for the lack of health care.

If we miss this chance, if we miss this challenge of nearly a century's duration, when Teddy Roosevelt, one of the great Presidents of this country, a Republican President of this country, said a hundred years ago we need to have health care coverage for all Americans--this is not a new idea, but it is

an idea whose time has surely come--the years between this chance and our next one will be filled with stories that are unworthy of America at its best.

Stories like Linda's, who wrote to The New York Times of the anguish she felt suffering from abdominal cancer and standing in the hospital just feet away from the drugs that could help save her life, drugs her insurance company was denying her.

Stories like Deamonte Driver's from Prince George's County, just a few miles down the road, who died at the age of 12 from a toothache, a toothache that was not treated by a dentist; and, as a result, it became infected. That infection went into his brain. He was in the hospital for 30 days at a cost of $250,000. Why? Because he didn't have $80 to get that tooth filled.

This bill will change that. We can be better than that. America is better than that. We must be.

Americans rightly want to know what's in this bill for them and for their families, but there's also something important in this bill for us as a people: a system worthy of the values we profess and the principles we hold dear. We will vote for a healthier America. We will vote to give our fellow citizens a greater sense of security. We will vote to make Medicare stronger for our seniors. We will vote for a healthier economy, for affordable coverage for individuals and small business. We will vote to begin containing costs, which will otherwise be unsustainable for our children and for our grandchildren.

We will, in sum, my colleagues, on this historic day, vote for a more perfect Union of which our Founders dreamed.