Healthcare Tax Relief and Mandate Repeal Act

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 3 minutes.

Today reminds me of the movie ``Groundhog Day.'' For those of you who aren't familiar with the movie, it's about a TV weatherman who finds himself repeating the same day over and over again. No matter what he does, he's stuck on the same day. Does that sound familiar? I think it does.

Today, we will take yet another show vote on repealing the Affordable Care Act which will never become law. In fact, we're wasting 2 days debating its repeal when Congress should be focusing on jobs and reducing the deficit. This exercise in futility does nothing but attempt to turn the clock back on all the many benefits already in place for Americans across this country. Meanwhile, it increases the deficit, puts insurance companies back in charge of America's health care, increases costs, cuts benefits for Medicare seniors, and eliminates $40 billion in tax credits to help make insurance more affordable for small businesses.

Mr. Speaker, the Affordable Care Act ensures that hardworking middle class families will get the security they deserve and protects every American from the worst insurance company abuses. The law includes numerous provisions to keep health care costs low, promote prevention, and hold insurance companies accountable.

For those Americans who already have health care, whether through private insurance, Medicare, or Medicaid, the Affordable Care Act is already making your coverage more secure. For example, insurance companies no longer have unchecked power to cancel your policy, deny your child coverage due to a preexisting condition, or charge women more than men.

Over 80 million Americans have gained coverage of preventive care free of charge, like mammograms for women and wellness visits for seniors. Nearly 13 million Americans will receive a rebate this summer because their insurance company spent too much of their premium dollars on administrative costs or CEO bonuses, and 5.3 million seniors and people with disabilities have saved an average of over $600 on prescription drugs and the doughnut hole in Medicaid coverage, Medicare coverage. Also, 6.6 million young adults have been able to stay on their parents' plans until the age of 26, including 3.1 million young people who were newly insured--and I hear about this all the time when I am home in my district.

For those Americans who yet don't have health insurance, help is really on the way. Starting in 2014, the Affordable Care Act will offer an array of quality, affordable, private health insurance plans to choose from. If someone can't afford insurance, or for a small business that wants to provide affordable insurance to their employees, tax credits are available that make coverage affordable.

The result of this repeal, which the Republicans are putting forth today, is to basically say that millions of middle class Americans will lose out on new health freedoms and new health coverage that make a positive difference in their lives. Rather than refight these old partisan battles by starting over on health care and repealing basic protections that provide security for the middle class, Congress needs to work together to focus on the economy and create jobs.

The House Republican leadership would do well to seek bipartisan solutions to jobs and the economy instead of seeking this repeal.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Eshoo).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Engel).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gene Green).

I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. DeGette).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Capps).

Mr. Speaker, can I inquire about how much time remains on both sides?

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gonzalez).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Butterfield).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Castor).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Lujan).

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Murphy).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Scott).

Mr. Speaker, may I inquire again about the time on both sides that remains?

I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee).

I yield the gentlewoman an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. Speaker, I have no additional speakers at this time, so I'll reserve the balance of my time.

I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

I yield myself 1 minute, Mr. Speaker.

I am amazed by the comments that the previous speaker made on the Republican side. The fact of the matter is that the Affordable Care Act amounts to a tax cut.

Right now, in the State of New Jersey, for people who are paying for their health insurance, we estimate that about $1,000 or $1,500 annually from their premiums is actually going to pay for those who are uninsured, for people who don't have insurance and have to go to the emergency rooms and then don't pay their bills.

Once the Affordable Care Act fully kicks in, because of the fact that everyone will be insured and all those people who now go to the emergency rooms and have no insurance will, in fact, have coverage, for the people who are paying their premiums right now, they're actually going to be paying less--it will be a tax cut--because they won't be paying for those people who now are uninsured.

I think it's really incredible because, if you think about it, the Republicans always talk about personal responsibility. How is it fair that people don't have themselves covered? How is it that they don't carry health insurance and then make other people pay for it?

I reserve the balance of my time.

I will ask if the gentleman has any additional speakers.

How much time do I have remaining, Mr. Speaker?

I will close at this time, and yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, let me say over again--and I know we've had this debate so many times that it really sounds like we just keep repeating the same thing--that this is a very important day at some level because the fact of the matter is the Republicans continue with this effort to try to repeal what is probably one of the most important pieces of legislation that has ever passed in the last few years in the Congress and has been signed by the President.

The reason is that, for the first time, when the Affordable Care Act fully kicks in, most Americans--probably 98.99 percent of Americans-- will have health insurance. We estimate maybe 30, 40--perhaps more-- million Americans right now do not have health insurance.

There are probably as many who are what we call ``underinsured.'' In other words, they can't really buy a good benefit package.

The fact of the matter is, by 2014, when the Affordable Care Act fully kicks in, you'll be able to go on an exchange either in your State or anywhere in the country and find a good benefit package, one that's as good probably as what you would get now under Blue Cross or Blue Shield, good benefits at a good price. That is an amazing thing. We've been here for 200 years in this country and were never able to say that that would actually happen.

I heard my colleagues on the Republican side in the Rules Committee say last night, We'll just repeal this and we'll come up with a better plan.

But they haven't come up with a better plan. They talk about health savings accounts and malpractice and all these different things that are basically around the edges. They would pretty much not guarantee most Americans, as they do under the Affordable Care Act, that they would be able to access health insurance, the peace of mind that goes with that and all the benefits that have already kicked in that would be repealed under this bill:

The fact that seniors eventually won't have to worry about the doughnut hole and will have their prescription drug coverage no matter how much they actually spend, that they'll only have to pay a co-pay; the fact that so many seniors now have preventive care; the fact that kids up to 26 years old can go on their parents' health insurance policy. So many people talk to me about that.

There's also the fact that preexisting conditions for women and others is no

longer a factor in terms of your ability to buy health insurance; the fact that there are no more lifetime caps, recisions, all these discriminatory practices that we've had in the past when you are trying to buy health insurance.

The fact of the matter is that already, over the last few years, most of these discriminatory practices have been eliminated. Many people may not even realize it's a result of the Affordable Care Act, but the fact is that it is. That's why these discriminatory practices are going away.

Last night, the chairman of the Rules Committee said, We'll repeal this and we will do something and be different, and the insurance companies will continue not to have these discriminatory practices. That's simply not true. The insurance companies will go back to the discriminatory practices if you repeal this bill. They'll almost be forced to. Because of the way this is set up, when everybody has health insurance, then the insurance companies can make enough money, if you will, so they don't have to discriminate. But they'll go back to it if this is repealed.

I ask my colleagues to stop bringing this up. This is a bad bill. Let's defeat it now, and let's continue the way we should with the Affordable Care Act in light of the Supreme Court's decision.

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

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

After seven decades of frustrated efforts, the Congress and the President acted on health reform. It was seven decades that this institution wrestled with health reform. Finally, it happened.

The Republican answer: Repeal. First, it was repeal Social Security, then repeal Medicare, then repeal Medicaid by block-granting it to the States. Now it's the same old song: Repeal health care reform.

This Republican Party, the party of repeal, captured by the radical right, would now put insurance companies back in charge of health care and repeal coverage for 17 million children with preexisting conditions, repeal coverage for 6.6 million adults now covered under their parents' insurance plan, repeal tax credits for 360,000 small employers covering 2 million workers, repeal ending lifetime caps on insurance for 105 million, and repeal closing of the burdensome doughnut hole for seniors' prescription medicines.

The Republican Party of Repeal says: Repeal and replace. Yet there has not been a single comprehensive bill proposed by the Republicans at any point in this session or before. Indeed, the only comprehensive health plan presented by the Republicans was put forward by Mitt Romney when he was Governor of Massachusetts. This is how he described his plan as recently as 2010:

Right now, in lots of parts of the country, if individuals

do not have insurance, they can arrive at the hospital and be

given free care paid for by government. Our current system is

a Big Government system. A conservative approach is one that

relies on individual responsibility. But in my view, and

others are free to disagree, expecting people who can afford

to buy insurance to do so is consistent with personal

responsibility, and that's a cornerstone of conservatism.

Well, the ones who are free to disagree are his fellow Republicans. The Massachusetts plan, with an individual mandate, reflected an original conservative Heritage Foundation proposal. Indeed, bills with an individual responsibility provision have been cosponsored by Republicans for two decades.

Now, however, Republicans have been captured by the radical right and taken a 180-degree turn. This repeal bill only deepens and widens the gulf handcuffing this Congress. You know, it's as if we live in two different universes. Let me tell you about the universe that is lived in by people who have sent letters to me.

I quote one, for example, from Warren:

I am 41 years old, and I was diagnosed with a form of

arthritis about 3 years ago. Because the Supreme Court upheld

ObamaCare, I don't have to worry anymore. I know that I can't

be dropped from my insurance carrier.

A letter from Pamela of Madison Heights, talking about the premiums that she has seen. She is a nurse. She has seen how many people have been hurt by these costly premiums. She says:

I have watched those who have to undergo painful

procedures, or those who have been given a poor prognosis,

because they have not had access to preventive or even

standard medical treatment due to the cost. She says the

Affordable Care Act is right and just.

From David in Saint Clair Shores who says:

Honestly, I am a Republican, but I don't believe the health

insurance bill should be repealed. I would like to see

compromise towards improving the legislation, rather than

destroying it entirely.

From Nancy of Clinton Township, who writes this:

The part of the CARE Act that is most important to my

family, even my Republican husband, is the provision for our

college-age daughter. Our insurance dropped her at the age of

19, and we had to buy a separate policy

that was very expensive and had poor coverage. Now we can

save several thousands of dollars a year, which helps with

her education. And it makes me sad that more people don't

understand how wonderful this is. I would like the message to

get out to more people.

It makes me sad, she says, that more people don't understand how wonderful this is.

You know, middle class families have had lots to worry about since trying to recover from the worst recession in decades. So instead of making it harder for them, putting insurance companies back in the driver's seat, we should let reform proceed.

I'm the ranking member on the Ways and Means Committee. The chairman is here, too. We've had jobs bills thrown into the hopper that never come forth. Today we're going through the motions of repealing health reform for the 31st time this Congress.

What we need instead is to get the bills that are lodged in Ways and Means on jobs out on the floor and work together, instead of against each other and against the interests of the American people.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I yield myself 15 seconds.

If repeal occurred in California, it would mean the loss of coverage for 435,000 young adults. It also would mean over 12 million Californians would lose the ability to be sure that their lifetime limits would not kick in.

I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New York, a very distinguished member of our committee, Mr. Rangel.

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

I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished member from Washington, a member of our committee, Mr. McDermott.

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

I yield myself 10 seconds.

The gentleman from Louisiana voted for the $500 billion in Medicare savings twice. You come here and criticize, I guess, yourself.

I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia, a distinguished member of our committee, Mr. Lewis.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 15 seconds.

In Tennessee, as of December 2011, 59,000 young adults in Tennessee gained insurance coverage because of ACA, and almost 800,000 with Medicare received free preventive services--almost 800,000.

I now yield 2 minutes to the very distinguished colleague of mine from Massachusetts, a member of our committee, Mr. Neal.

I yield myself 20 seconds.

While there is a reference to disaster in Kentucky, here are the facts:

48,000 young adults in Kentucky gained insurance coverage;

Since ACA was enacted, Kentucky residents with Medicare have saved a total of $68 million;

538,000 people with Medicare in Kentucky received free preventative services.

That isn't a disaster; that's progress.

I now yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California, our distinguished colleague on the Ways and Means Committee, Mr. Thompson.

I yield myself 30 seconds.

There was a reference by the gentleman from Illinois about facts. Let me mention the facts.

As of December 2011, 125,000 young adults in Illinois gained insurance coverage. Since it was enacted, ACA, Illinois residents with Medicare have saved a total of $155 million on their prescription drugs and 1,350,000 people with Medicare in Illinois have received free preventive services. Those are the facts about health care reform.

I now yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer), another very distinguished member of our committee.

I yield the gentleman an additional minute.

I yield myself 30 seconds.

The gentleman from New York voted on the $500 billion Medicare provision twice, voted for it.

As of 2011, 160,000 young adults in New York gained insurance coverage because of health care reform. Since it was enacted, New Yorkers with Medicare have saved a total of $270 million on their prescription drugs. In 2011, 2 million people with Medicare in New York received free preventive services. Since 2010, over 3 million New Yorkers with private health insurance gained preventive insurance.

Mr. Speaker, how much time is there remaining on each side?

I yield myself 30 seconds.

Twenty-five percent of the people of Texas go to sleep every night without insurance--25 percent. And people come here defending the status quo?

As of December 2011, 357,000 young adults in Texas gained insurance coverage. Since it was enacted, Texans with Medicare have saved a total of over $220 million on prescription drugs, and over 2 million people with Medicare in Texas have received free preventive services. That's progress, in

contrast to the status quo, 25 percent uninsured.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, if you would tell the two of us from Michigan how much time there is on each side.

So why don't I reserve one more time, and then I'll go forward.

I now yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from the great State of Wisconsin (Mr. Kind), another distinguished member of our committee.

I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

I ask my colleague, how many speakers do you have left?

I now yield 2 minutes to the very distinguished member of our committee, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Crowley).

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

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

As I stand here, I want to remember others from the State of Michigan who years and years ago argued this issue. I think I'll go back to John Dingell's father, who was from Michigan, a Member of this distinguished body, and who started this effort with others to bring health insurance to every person in this country.

After seven decades of failure, we succeeded. Yet the Republicans want to repeal it without offering anything to replace it. So I'll quote again Governor Mitt Romney. He said:

A conservative approach is one that relies on individual

responsibility. But in my view, and others are free to

disagree, expecting people who can afford to buy insurance to

do so is consistent with personal responsibility, and that's

a cornerstone of conservatism.

It's really a cornerstone also of America as a community. To repeal this is to undermine the sense and reality of community in the United States of America. Remembering the past and looking to the future, we must vote ``no'' on repeal.

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

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

We're here today to repeal a law that is both fundamentally flawed and overwhelmingly unpopular. The problem with this law, among its many faults, is it puts government at the center of health care decisions, not doctors and patients.

Instead of families and employers deciding what coverage is best for them, the Secretary of Health and Human Services makes that choice.

Instead of families and employers deciding what they can afford to spend on insurance, the IRS makes that decision.

Instead of families and employers deciding if they even need or want health insurance in the first place, the government mandates they purchase it.

This is all about the government. It is Washington knows best, and it's wrong.

By virtually every measure, this law is a failure. The price tag of the law has already doubled, health care premiums are going up, Americans are losing the insurance they have and like, taxes are being raised by over $1.5 trillion, and 12 of the 21 new taxes in the law will hit the middle class. It increases costs for 9 out of 10 seniors. It's paid for with budget gimmicks that even the government's own actuaries admit are not workable.

According to the Congressional Budget Office, the law hinders job creation, which is something we can hardly afford after 41 consecutive months of the unemployment rate being above 8 percent.

To put it bluntly, this law is bad for workers, seniors, families, patients, doctors, and employers. As the Supreme Court ruled, the cornerstone of the Democrats' health care law, the individual mandate, is a massive tax. The Congressional Budget Office predicts that approximately 20 million Americans will either pay the tax or be forced to buy insurance they otherwise wouldn't have purchased. That's 20 million people. Only two States in the U.S. have more than 20 million people: California and Texas. Clearly, this is a major tax with major implications.

Democrats have argued that the individual mandate was necessary to improve the Nation's health. What's next? Will they require you to purchase low-fat or low-salt foods, or will you have to pay a tax because they think it's good for you?

House Republicans have heard the American people loud and clear, and we will not let government--let alone the IRS--dictate your health care. We will repeal this law so you're again free to choose your health insurance plan, to choose your doctor, and to choose the medical treatment that best meets your needs. Most important of all, we will ensure you have the freedom to choose what's best for you and your family.

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

I would just note that our health care bill was the only bill scored by the Congressional Budget Office that actually reduced the premiums.

I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished chairman of the Health Subcommittee, the gentleman from California (Mr. Herger).

I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished chairman of the Select Revenue Subcommittee, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Tiberi).

I yield 2 minutes to a distinguished member of the Ways and Means Committee, the gentleman from Louisiana, Dr. Boustany.

I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to a distinguished member of the Ways and Means Committee, the gentlewoman from Tennessee (Mrs. Black).

I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished chairman of the Human Resources Subcommittee, the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Davis).

At this time I yield 2 minutes to a distinguished member of the Ways and Means Committee, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Schock).

At this time I yield 2 minutes to a distinguished member of the Ways and Means Committee, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Reed).

At this time I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Brady), the distinguished chairman of the Trade Subcommittee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Smith), a distinguished member of the Ways and Means Committee.

At this time I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Fleming).

Mr. Speaker, at this time I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Huizenga).

I yield the gentleman an additional 15 seconds.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Quayle).

At this time, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Nunnelee).

At this time, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Lamborn).

At this time, Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Pence).

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

I believe three or four.

How much time is remaining?

At this time, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Florida (Mr. Southerland).

At this time, I yield 30 seconds to the distinguished Member from Colorado (Mr. Tipton).

At this time, I yield 30 seconds to the distinguished gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Gosar).

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

Mr. Speaker, this law is overwhelmingly unpopular, and the reason it is is because it is fundamentally flawed. The flaw is that government is being placed at the center of health care decisions that should be made by doctors and families together, not by the government.

Look at the other measures that we can use to examine this law. The pricetag of the law has already doubled. It's over $1.8 trillion now. Health care premiums are going up. They're not going down as result of this law. They're going in the other direction. And Americans are losing the insurance they have. And there is a perverse incentive in this bill for employers to drop coverage because it's cheaper for them to pay the tax in the bill.

Also, taxes are being raised in general over a half a trillion dollars in this legislation, and 12 of the 21 new taxes in this law hit the middle class. It will make costs expensive for more than 90 percent of the seniors, and it's paid for with budget gimmicks that even the government actuaries say aren't going to work.

The Congressional Budget Office has said this law makes job creation harder. What we really need is to have a stronger economy that will help create jobs, but this law makes it harder, according to the CBO. We can't afford that after 41 months of unemployment above 8 percent. This law is bad for workers, bad for families, bad for patients, doctors, and employers.

I urge that we repeal this law, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, unbelievably, across this country in family law courts, in States, our servicemembers stand before family law court judges who take custody away from our servicemembers upon their return from either, previously, Iraq or, now, Afghanistan based solely on the fact that they were away from their children serving their country.

Mr. Speaker, we should not have one arm of the government ordering our servicemembers to deploy and another arm of our government taking their children away from them based upon the fact that they were away servicing their country. One servicemember, Eva Slusher, who has been a champion of this issue, has said that she did not understand when she got back, by law, they had to give her her job back but, by law, no one had to return to her her child.

Servicemembers risk their lives in support of the contingency operations that keep our Nation safe. State courts should not be allowed to use a servicemember's previous deployments or the possibility of future deployments when making child custody determinations. State courts should not be allowed to use a servicemember's previous deployments or the possibility when making these child custody determinations.

Our bill would amend the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act to protect servicemembers against this injustice by providing a uniform national standard. The lack of uniform laws creates uncertainty that adversely affects readiness and morale.

State laws differ on the question of whether deployment or the potential for future deployment can be used as a criterion for these courts, and many States have no laws at all. The difference in State laws provides an opportunity for ex-spouses to venue shop to find a State that will alter custody agreements. Many servicemember custody battles involve up to three States: the State of the original custody order, the State where the child is residing, and the State where the servicemember is stationed.

This bill creates a protective floor to ensure that all military parents can feel confident that their service to our country will not be used against them in our courts.

In supporting this legislation, Secretary Gates stated: ``I am convinced that the benefits outweigh the concerns and, thus, we should work with Congress to pursue an acceptable legislative formulation.''

The language of this bill has passed the House on seven separate occasions, and the bill has strong bipartisan support. I have a letter to Leon Panetta that is signed by every member of the House Armed Services Committee that I will enter into the Record.

Our men and women in uniform sacrifice a great deal to serve our country. We owe it to them to provide uniform legal standards regarding child custody. Our servicemen and -women should never be in the position of having to choose between their country and their family; or while they're on service, they should not have to worry what might happen to them when they return.

House of Representatives,

Washington, DC, March 29, 2012.

Mr. Leon Panetta,

Secretary of Defense,

Washington, DC.

Dear Secretary Panetta: We appreciate your interest stated

during the February 15, 2012 House Armed Services Committee

(HASC) hearing in protecting child custody rights for our men

and women in uniform.

As you know, legislative language addressing this issue has

already passed the House of Representatives on six separate

occasions. It has passed five times as part of the National

Defense Authorization Act, every year from 2008 through 2012.

Additionally, in 2008 this language passed the House as a

stand-alone bill (H.R. 6048) by voice vote. Sixty members

from both sides of the aisle signed

on to H.R. 6048 as co-sponsors. Most recently, the bill was

included in the Managers Package in the FY12 House NDAA and

was supported by the Department of Defense (DoD).

Enclosed are letters of support that both Secretary Gates

and Secretary Stanley provided for this legislation last

year. Also enclosed is the 2010 HASC letter to Secretary

Gates. As we move forward with the current legislative

session, we look forward to the same level of support from

the DoD in addressing this important issue and ensuring that

our men and women in uniform have their parental rights

protected.

Sincerely,

Michael R. Turner,

Member of Congress.

Robert Andrews,

Member of Congress.

HASC Signatures

Michael Turner, Rob Andrews, Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon,

Chairman, Adam Smith, Ranking Member, Mac Thornberry, Vice

Chairman, Roscoe G. Bartlett, Walter B. Jones, W. Todd Akin,

J. Randy Forbes, Jeff Miller, Joe Wilson, Frank A. LoBiondo,

John Kline, Mike Rogers, Trent Franks, Bill Shuster, K.

Michael Conaway, Doug Lamborn, Rob Wittman, Duncan Hunter,

John C. Fleming, Mike Coffman, Thomas J. Rooney, Todd Russell

Platts, Scott Rigell, Chris Gibson, Vicky Hartzler, Joe Heck,

Bobby Schilling, Jon Runyan, Austin Scott.

Tim Griffin, Steve Palazzo, Allen West, Martha Roby, Mo

Brooks, Todd Young, Silvestre Reyes, Loretta Sanchez, Mike

McIntyre, Robert A. Brady, Susan A. Davis, James R. Langevin,

Rick Larsen, Jim Cooper, Madeleine Z. Bordallo, Joe Courtney,

David Loebsack, Niki Tsongas, Chellie Pingree, Larry Kissell,

Martin Heinrich, William L. Owens, John Garamendi, Mark

Critz, Tim Ryan, C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger, Hank Johnson,

Betty Sutton, Colleen Hanabusa, Kathleen C. Hochul, Jackie

Speier.

Mr. Speaker, in March, to mark the 2-year anniversary of the signing of ObamaCare, I invited local doctors, business owners, and elected officials to talk about how the law will change the practice of health care on every level.

We heard from Dr. Gerald Rothacker about the law's failure to reform medical liability and how young doctors don't even realize they're practicing defensive medicine, ordering unnecessary tests, and driving up costs. We heard from Gary Alexander, Pennsylvania's secretary for the Department of Public Welfare, about how the law will cause State spending to explode in the coming years.

While Medicaid consumes 30 percent of the State budget now, if the law is fully implemented, it will consume over 60 percent. Pennsylvania won't be a State government. It will be a health plan that paves roads and funds schools on the side.

We also heard from Kirby Sensenig, the owner of a local roofing company. He spoke about the difficult choice he will have to make in coming years about whether to keep providing insurance for his workers, or to pay the penalty and cast them into the health care exchanges.

We all know how much health care reform was needed. We've all heard the stories about individuals denied care that they desperately needed. We've heard about the families who struggled to pay the bills when a child got sick. We all know someone who went without insurance because of the high cost

of premiums. But this law did not fix what was broken. It didn't deliver the reform the American people really wanted.

The savings, both for the government and for families, are an illusion. Don't pat yourselves on the back for gaming the CBO. There won't be a single dime saved by the law. Indeed, government spending will explode because of the law. ObamaCare's new entitlement program and massive Medicaid expansion is estimated to cost taxpayers $1.8 trillion over the next decade.

Things aren't much better for families under ObamaCare. In 2011 alone, the annual premium for an employer-sponsored family plan soared past $15,000. That's a sharp 9 percent increase from 2010. Twenty new taxes impose additional costs on everything from flexible spending accounts to pacemakers. That's 20 new taxes in ObamaCare not yet implemented. It will be taxing medical devices, drug manufacturers, and insurers. It drives up the cost of care. It is a farce to think that government subsidies will balance out the increased costs imposed by all the new taxes and regulations.

Finally, the reach of the Federal Government has extended even to the conscience of religious charities and educational institutions. When the government takes over health care, it takes over basic decisions of morality that should be left up to individuals. It's far past time we ended the destruction of our health care system by a poorly designed and administered law. Full repeal is the only way to get to real reform. I urge support for the bill.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to another member of the Energy and Commerce Committee, the gentlelady from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn).

Mr. Speaker, today I'm happy to yield 2 minutes to another distinguished member of the Health Subcommittee, the gentleman from Georgia, Dr. Gingrey.

Mr. Speaker, at this time I'm happy to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Harper).

Mr. Speaker, at this time I am pleased to yield 1 minute to another valued member of the Health Subcommittee, the gentleman from Louisiana, Dr. Cassidy.

Mr. Speaker, at this time, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Olson).

Mr. Speaker, at this time, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Kinzinger), another member of the Energy and Commerce Committee.

Mr. Speaker, at this time I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Montana (Mr. Rehberg).

Mr. Speaker, at this time I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the distinguished Member from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner).

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the distinguished Member from Nebraska (Mr. Fortenberry).

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Grimm).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlelady from New York (Ms. Buerkle).

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Mulvaney).

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentlelady from Kansas (Ms. Jenkins).

No. We are prepared to close.

If this new law is so outstanding, I wonder why the administration has granted over 1,000 waivers to their friends so they don't have to meet the requirements of the law.

The President promised not to raise taxes on anyone making less than $250,000. He has broken that pledge 20 times with this new law. Many of them are impacting the middle class that he promised not to raise taxes on. That's $800 billion in new taxes.

My friends, the American people have a clear choice: Keep this law and pay the new taxes or take the law off the books and let's start over again with some real free-market reforms.

I urge support for the bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.