E-LABEL Act

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

I am, in its current form.

Mr. Speaker, this is the final amendment to H.R. 3522, which will not kill the bill or send it back to committee. If adopted, the bill will immediately proceed to final passage as amended.

My amendment would ensure that nothing in the underlying act would result in health care discrimination against women. It would prevent insurance companies from charging small businesses that employ women higher premiums, and it would stop insurance companies from selling group plans that deny women contraception or critical maternity care coverage.

I hope that we can all agree that women should never have to pay more for their health care than men would pay simply because of their gender. Being a woman is not and must never be treated as a preexisting condition.

Health care reform has created many new and needed consumer protections, which are helping women live healthier lives and build stronger families. Health care costs are the number one cause of bankruptcy in the United States. Allowing insurance companies to charge women more than men would hurt working women struggling to make ends meet. It would hurt families raising children who are trying to give them the healthy start they deserve.

Before this unfair practice was banned, the National Women's Law Center reported that gender discrimination in premium prices alone cost women approximately $1 billion per year more than men. That is $1 billion that could have prevented many women and their children from living in poverty or being homeless.

That is $1 billion that women and their families could have spent on rent. That is $1 billion that women and their families could have spent on child care. That is $1 billion that women and their families could have used to pay for college. That is $1 billion that women and their families could have used to start a business. That is $1 billion that could have been better used to strengthen the American economy.

In a nation where women earn only 77 cents for every dollar that men earn, charging women more for health care compounds the financial strain on women and their families. Stopping gender-based premium discrimination is just one example of health care reform that works, and it is a new consumer protection that women and their families cannot afford to lose.

My amendment will ensure that insurers continue to cover critical maternity care and contraception coverage. Until recently, many States did not require all health care plans to cover maternity care.

Today, the law requires every new insurance policy to cover maternity care. We must ensure that women continue to have access to this critical coverage and access to contraception coverage that gives many women the economic independence to succeed because when women succeed, America succeeds.

Contraception coverage ensures women can prevent unplanned pregnancies and choose the best time to start a family. When surveyed by the Guttmacher Institute, 63 percent of women said that access to contraception had enabled them to take better care of themselves and their families. Over half said they were better able to support themselves financially or complete their education.

Mr. Speaker, the majority of Americans support these policies. A Kaiser health poll found that Americans support birth control coverage by a 2 to 1 margin and 86 percent of Americans support coverage of maternity care.

A vote for my amendment is a vote to protect women from unfair discrimination. It is a vote promising our mothers, our sisters, and our daughters that they will be treated fairly and equally.

These are the values of my constituents in Ventura County, and they are the values of the American people.

I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the motion to recommit. Vote ``yes'' for equality for women.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 5161) to promote the non-exclusive use of electronic labeling for devices licensed by the Federal Communications Commission.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to insert extraneous material in the Record on the bill.

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

I rise today in support of H.R. 5161, the E-LABEL Act. This legislation that I introduced is a bipartisan and bicameral measure that marks an important step forward in modernizing our laws to reflects today's information and communications technology marketplace.

Over the past 20 years, there has been tremendous growth and innovation in both the communications and manufacturing industries. Smartphones, tablets, and other revolutionary devices come equipped with functionalities we could only imagine just a short time ago. In the midst of this innovation era, it is critical that our laws recognize these advancements and are updated to foster continued investment and opportunities for future development. The E-LABEL Act will facilitate this effort.

The E-LABEL Act establishes a timeline for the FCC to move forward with a rulemaking to permit the use of electronic labels instead of physical labels to certify that devices with screens have been approved for commercial use. Not only will this give manufacturers greater flexibility to design innovative products that consumers demand, but by some estimates, e-labeling will save manufacturers over $80 million a year. Consumers will also benefit from efficiencies created by e- labeling. E-labeling can expand consumer access to relevant device information and enhance the overall quality and availability of equipment identification records through supporting software. The E- LABEL Act represents good policy for both manufacturers and consumers and should be advanced without delay.

I thank Ranking Member Eshoo, Congressman Welch, and Congresswoman Blackburn for their support on this measure. I also thank Chairmen Upton and Walden for their continued support and leadership in modernizing our communication laws for the digital age. I urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan legislation.

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

Mr. Speaker, I would urge the House to support this legislation.

I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation, and I claim the time in opposition to the motion.

Mr. Speaker, this bill empowers female-owned small businesses and workers to keep the health care policies they prefer and make their own decisions regarding health care.

Women make 95 percent of the decisions regarding health insurance and families across the United States. I don't think we have to be patronizing and assume that they cannot make their own decisions.

In fact, I am asked continually by women who are 50 years and above why are they having to pay for maternity benefits. They are just flabbergasted by that.

This is important economically. The Manhattan Institute reports that the Affordable Care Act, so-called ironically, has increased insurance premiums by 41 percent on average--for women, as much as 62 percent.

Imagine that woman sitting at home, lying awake at night, wondering how she is going to pay her bills, being forced to pay for benefits the opposition doesn't think she is smart enough to know that she doesn't need and unable to afford her house. That has happened in an instance I know of.

Now, today, the House has the opportunity to help Americans keep the health care plan of their choice, and how we vote comes down to two questions: First, do you think control over

someone's health care plan should reside with a Washington politician or bureaucrat? Or do you trust that American woman to make the proper decision for herself, for her family?

I will tell you where I stand: I think we should give power to the patient, not to a Washington bureaucrat.

Secondly, do we think that politicians should keep the promises made to constituents? Four years ago, supporters of the health care law looked Americans in the eye and said, ``If you like your health care plan, you can keep it, period.''

I tell you where I stand. Representatives in the people's House should honor their word and uphold the commitment to those who sent us here, period.

Let's protect the health care choices of America's workers. Let's hold politicians accountable for the promises they made.

I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the motion to recommit. Vote ``yes'' to protect the health care plans of America's middle class. Vote ``yes'' to keep the promises made.

Vote ``no'' on the motion to recommit, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 3670, the Anti-Spoofing Act and H.R. 5161, the E-LABEL Act.

H.R. 3670 updates the Truth in Caller ID Act of 2009 to combat against fraudulent phone calls and text messages received by millions of Americans, including seniors, veterans and the disabled. According to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), ``caller ID spoofing'' is defined as the deliberate falsification of caller ID information, including a telephone number and/or name for the purpose of disguising the identity of the calling party.

Just last month, the San Diego County Sheriff's Department reported a series of spoofing incidents in which San Diegans received calls purported to be from the Sheriff's office, indicating a warrant for their arrest. With similar reports of fraudulent behavior around the country, this bipartisan, pro-consumer bill will better protect Americans from becoming victims of scammers. I commend Representative Meng for her leadership and I urge the House to pass this commonsense bill.

I also urge House colleagues to support H.R. 5161, a bipartisan bill which I introduced with Representatives Latta, Welch and Blackburn in July. Following on the E-Labeling guidance issued by the FCC this summer, H.R. 5161 would promote electronic labeling for FCC certified devices such as phones, computers, smart watches and other consumer electronics products.

As the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF) described in a July op-ed, ``etching 17 characters into a phone might not seem like a Herculean feat, but as wireless devices have proliferated and shrunk in size, many manufacturers have been forced to buy increasingly expensive equipment and invest more design time into placing the label.'' Electronic labeling thus provides manufacturers with a more practical solution to existing FCC labeling requirements and does so while lowering device costs.

I urge my colleagues to join me in voting for H.R. 3670 and H.R. 5161.

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

I rise today in support of H.R. 5161, the E-LABEL Act.

This bipartisan bill will modernize the Federal Communications Commission's device certification rules by eliminating the requirement for device manufacturers to include etched labels on the outside body of each electronic

device. Instead, device manufacturers will have the flexibility to display FCC certification information through software on device screens.

There are numerous potential benefits to e-labeling. For example, e- labels can provide more information to consumers than is conveyed today, such as details regarding the device warranties, recycling, and trade-in opportunities. E-labeling will also lower production costs for device manufacturers since affixing labels to a device can require significant design time and expensive equipment.

I would also note that we should commend FCC Chairman Wheeler and his staff in the Office of Engineering and Technology for recently taking steps to update the Commission's e-labeling policies.

By working together with the FCC, we can provide innovators with more flexibility and speed the delivery of new devices in the marketplace.

I want to thank my colleague, Mr. Latta, for his leadership on this issue, and I urge my colleagues to join me in the support of H.R. 5161, the E-LABEL Act.

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