Supporting Medicare Providers Act of 2021

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Madam Speaker, pending Senate passage of the CR tonight without amendment, the House will not be in session tomorrow--I want to reiterate, pending passage of the CR tonight. If the CR is not passed, we will be in session tomorrow at 9.

If the Senate fails to act, as I just said, we will meet at 9 a.m. for legislative business and expect to vote on some of the postponed suspensions. Members are encouraged to keep their schedules flexible as we work to fully fund government and prevent a shutdown at 12 midnight tomorrow night.

Next week, on Monday, pending Senate action on full government funding and H.R. 6119, the Further Extending Government Act, being signed into law, the House is no longer expected to meet. This is a change from our previously announced schedule. We will not be in session Monday, assuming we have funded the government.

On Tuesday, the House will meet at 12 p.m. for morning hour and 2 p.m. for legislative business.

On Wednesday and Thursday, the House will meet at 10 a.m. for morning hour and 12 p.m. for legislative business.

On Friday, the House will meet at 9 a.m. for legislative business, as was previously scheduled.

The House will consider several bills under suspension of the rules. The complete list of suspension bills will be announced by the close of business tomorrow.

Additionally, the House will pass H.R. 4350, the National Defense Authorization Act, again, a second time, to provide our troops with the pay they deserve and our military with the tools it needs to carry out its missions safely and effectively, keep America safe, and keep the peace.

Again, I will reiterate that is the second time we will pass this version. As I understand it, it will be the conference-agreed version of the defense bill. This has been a discussion between the House and the Senate.

The House will also consider H.R. 8363, the Protecting Our Democracy

Act, to reassert Congress' role as a coequal branch of government by addressing the vulnerabilities exploited by the former President and his enablers to weaken our democracy, undermine the rule of law, and subvert the systems of checks and balances enshrined by the Framers in our Constitution.

The House may also consider legislation to address the debt limit and prevent a manufactured economic catastrophe that would derail our recovery from the pandemic and cause needless suffering to millions of American families.

I would reiterate that while we don't know the exact date at which America will be unable to pay its bills, we will address this next week, hopefully, in a bipartisan fashion.

Moreover, the House will be ready to act on H.R. 5376, the Build Back Better Act, should the Senate amend it and send it back to the House.

Lastly, of course, additional legislative items are possible.

We have a list of suspension bills, which has been announced and has been on our calendar for consideration. Those would be the pieces of legislation with which we would deal, pending action by the Senate.

Well, I think we will probably have to wait to see exactly what is going to happen. As the gentleman knows, we have passed a debt limit twice through this House. There has been a problem in the Senate, and I would expect Senator Schumer and Senator McConnell will be discussing that in the next few days.

Senator McConnell has made it very clear that he thinks that failing to protect the full faith and credit of the United States of America would have dire adverse consequences, so he has made it very clear he thinks we ought not to do that. Senator Schumer has done the same.

Essentially, my answer to the gentleman is, we have passed it twice in one form or another, so we can pass it and will pass it once the Senate agrees on a version. The two leaders are discussing that, I am sure. Now, I haven't talked to either one of them, but that is my premise.

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman, and I agree with his comments. It is my understanding, although I haven't talked personally, but it is my understanding that introducing the conference-agreed bill in the House, and passing it through the House will, under Senate procedures, facilitate them resolving this issue, hopefully, in a positive way next week.

Madam Speaker, I agree with the gentleman. We have talked to the sponsor, and we have talked to others. I expect this bill to be on the floor next week.

If the gentleman would yield?

With respect to the issues that I think we have broad agreement on, the cliffs that were created on Medicare and sequester are not good policy, and we ought to act on those. We are very seized of that issue, and hopefully, we can resolve something next week.

The gentleman mentions doing it in a bipartisan fashion. The good news is, and I know the gentleman will agree, that earlier this year, we delayed to January 1 of this coming year these items, particularly the 2 percent sequester by a vote of 90-2 in the Senate, meaning only two people voted against it, and in the House, 384. We were unanimous on our side, but you had the overwhelming majority on your side as well. So by 384-38, we extended that.

I am hopeful that we will do that again in a bipartisan way because not to do so, I think, would be very harmful to the medical community, to the country, and, obviously, to patients that are served by the medical community.

I am hopeful that we can resolve that as early as next week.

Madam Speaker, I rise for the purpose of inquiring of the majority leader the schedule for next week. I yield to my friend, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), to talk about the schedule for next week.

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for that update. As it relates to tomorrow's schedule, as the gentleman from Maryland said, it could be fluid, depending on how the CR is processed in the Senate. If the CR does not pass the Senate tonight, are there bills that are specifically designated to come up tomorrow, or is that a to-be- determined issue?

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for that update.

As it relates to the debt ceiling, we had a discussion a few weeks ago relating to the debt ceiling. Would there be a bipartisan negotiation? We haven't had that so far. Is there anticipation that there would be a plan to try to engage both sides in a negotiation on the debt ceiling, or is this something that we are just going to have to wait to see next week?

Well, then we will see what develops from that discussion.

As it relates to the National Defense Authorization Act, and as the gentleman pointed out, we are aware there are bipartisan negotiations between both the House and Senate, Republicans and Democrats.

I share the hope and expectation that they can come to an agreement. There are a few final details that both sides are trying to work out. I think they have already agreed, which we both share, that our troops deserve a pay raise, need a pay raise, and that number has been agreed to.

Hopefully, that is part of this, as well as the proper funding levels for our Nation's defense as we see threats emerging throughout the world. We also know the detriment of not having proper defense funding because they can't enter into the contracts that are necessary.

Both of those conversations seem to be, from what we are hearing, going well. Hopefully, that is a bill that can come to the floor next week, and we can all come together to help pass that.

Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentleman for any comments.

Madam Speaker, there are two specific pieces of legislation I would like to ask the gentleman to look at.

One is, by the end of the year, as you know, there are some potential cuts coming to entities like Medicare if Congress doesn't take action. There is a bipartisan bill that members of the Doctors Caucus and other members of the Committee on Energy and Commerce and other committees of jurisdiction have worked on. It is H.R. 6020. That would stave off those cuts to our healthcare providers.

It would need to be passed by the end of the year--otherwise, those cuts would automatically kick in--if the gentleman could take a look at that bill and see if that is something we could do in a bipartisan way before we leave for the year.

Another would be, you and I have had this conversation successfully on other legislation dealing with ALS. The Steve Gleason Act was one of those; there are others. I have spoken to Steve Gleason recently. There is a piece of legislation that we were able to work on that got out of the Committee on Energy and Commerce unanimously. It is H.R. 3537, the Accelerating Access to Critical Therapies for ALS Act.

I would just ask if the gentleman could look at that bill. It came out unanimously, bipartisan, from the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and it is something that, obviously, would help a lot of people who could use that help.

Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentleman.

Well, that would be great news to so many people across the country.

Madam Speaker, I share that sentiment the gentleman had, and hopefully, we can achieve those bipartisan victories.

As you mentioned, H.R. 3537 would be a tremendous victory for people who struggle with ALS to continue to seek out new therapies and be able to live their lives in the best way possible. I appreciate the gentleman's past efforts as well as the offer to bring that bill to the floor next week.

Madam Speaker, if the gentleman doesn't have anything else, I thank the gentleman, and I yield back the balance of my time.