Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise this morning with good news and bad news.

This news comes by way of my hometown newspaper, the Houston Chronicle, and I'm proud that they have printed and published the news that I'm about to share with the public. The bad news is that Mr. Yondell Johnson was accosted and beaten on the streets of Houston, Texas, simply because of his race. This is bad news for anyone in our great country, a country that believes in liberty and justice for all.

The good news, however, is they were prosecuted and they were convicted in a Federal court pursuant to the James Byrd hate crime law, and I'm honored to tell you that that law passed here in this Congress in 2009 and was signed into law. It is properly styled as the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act. It was supported by many people and organizations expressing goodwill. The NAACP supported it, the ADL supported it, a good many Members of this Congress supported it, and many others supported this law. This law allowed the prosecution to take place in a Federal court, when these three men would have been charged in a State court, and if convicted, faced misdemeanor charges.

In this, the greatest country in the world, no one should have to fear for life or liberty simply because of who you are, simply because of your race, your ethnicity, your gender, your sexuality. It shouldn't happen in this country.

The truth is that in this case there was some testimony with reference to one of the defendants having dated a person of African ancestry. There was testimony that he did not appear to be the kind of person that would be considered a white supremacist. But here is another truth that we have to deal with. The truth is that there is confusion about the hate crime law. There's a misunderstanding. This law does not allow you to impose dastardly deeds upon persons simply because you are of the same race as the person that you are assaulting.

The truth is that if you assault and target a person because of race, it doesn't matter what your race is, and you are committing a hate crime. The truth is that you can be of the same race and commit a hate crime. The victim and the perpetrator can be of the same race and you will still have a hate crime. We need to rid ourselves of this foolish notion that this law was passed in some way to assault persons who are of an ethnicity or a race that we have traditionally, in this country, found to be engaged in some of these kinds of activities. It's not targeted at any given race; it's targeted at people who commit crimes against other people simply because of who these people are.

I remind you that an injustice against any one of us is a threat to justice for every one of us, and we all have a duty to make sure that we don't send out some silly notion that this law was designed for one race of people. This law was designed for every person who would commit a hate crime against another person.

So I'm saddened to say this morning that the bad news is Mr. Johnson had

to fight off several persons, stood his ground for 10 minutes, but indicated that he thought he was going to die as they assaulted him. That's the bad news. The good news is that the law has worked, that this law is bringing new meaning to the notion of justice for all. This law will not allow those who would commit dastardly deeds and be prosecuted in State courts for misdemeanors to go unchecked. They will now face felony charges in our Federal courts. This is the way it should be in the greatest country in the world.

Mr. Speaker, God bless all listening, and God bless the United States of America.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to say thank you to the many persons who supported the Homes for Heroes Act that passed the day before yesterday. This is an important piece of legislation that will place a person in HUD whose sole responsibility it is to monitor homelessness among our veterans. We believe that in solving the homelessness problem, we can also solve a lot of other problems that they have.

I would like to thank all of the persons on the committee, especially my chairman of the committee, Mr. Bachus; my ranking member, Mr. Frank; Ms. Waters, who has helped me for years with this legislation. I would like to thank Mrs. Biggert and Mr. Gutierrez, the chair and ranking member of the subcommittee. I would also thank Mr. Cantor, because I did have a chance to visit with him about this, and he helped to promote this legislation. Ms. Pelosi, of course, is a big supporter of our veterans, as is the case with Mr. Hoyer.

Also, one additional person that was very helpful, Mr. Hensarling. He and I had a great conversation about this, and he was very supportive and mentioned it in open mic at one of our hearings. So I thank everyone. Our veterans are better served.

God bless the United States of America and thank God for our veterans.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to say to all who are within the sound of my voice or may be viewing what is said that I am exceedingly grateful and I thank God for Reverend Al Sharpton.

Reverend Sharpton has been involved in the Trayvon Martin circumstance for some time now. That is not unusual. What may be considered unusual is that he is involved at a time when he has lost his mother, and he is acting under some courageous circumstances that require courage, I might say, under these circumstances. I admire what he does, but I especially admire the fact that he is doing it under these circumstances, and today he is funeralizing his mother.

So to Reverend Al Sharpton, I want to express my gratitude; and I would like to just take a very short brief moment of silence and express my sympathies silently to Reverend Sharpton and his family.

Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank all of my colleagues who have supported what the Justice Department is doing. It is exceedingly important that people understand that this is a bipartisan effort across the length and breadth of this country. This transcends the lines that can divide us. This is not about being a conservative. It's not about being a liberal. It's about justice for Trayvon Martin. I believe that people of goodwill come in all stripes, they are affiliated with all parties, and people of goodwill want to see justice done.

My colleague before me expressed that it has been 31 days and there has not been an arrest. We are now hearing more about what may have happened. I say ``may have happened'' because we have not had an eyewitness to come forward and give statements. It's important to note that what we're hearing is not coming by way of eyewitness testimony. Someone has had someone say something that they are repeating.

My hope is that there will be a thorough investigation. There should be an investigation. My hope is that we will have the opportunity to produce evidence by and through the constabulary to show what actually happened to the extent that the standard that is commonly used to make an arrest is applied to this case. That standard is probable cause. It is not guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, not clear and convincing evidence, but, rather, probable cause. It is whether there is probable cause to make an arrest.

We have many laws that are coming into play, and I want to thank Chairman John Conyers. I call him chairman. He is now the ranking member of the Judiciary Committee. I want to thank him because he is taking the lead today on a forum that will take place. In fact, he's making it possible for us to have this forum today. At this forum today, there will be some clarity brought to how the Federal Government is involved in these kinds of circumstances.

In '09, there was a hate crimes law that was passed. There will be some considerable talk about this hate crimes law that was passed. Federal jurisdiction has been expanded under the '09 law, pursuant to the 14th Amendment and the equal protection provided thereunder. There will be talk about how the Justice Department has a role in these processes from time to time. There will be talk about how financial support can be accorded the local constabulary under certain circumstances. There will be talk about how Federal charges can be promulgated and enforced under certain circumstances. So I will be honored to have an opportunity to be at this forum today so that we can talk more about the Federal role.

In the final analysis, here's what we're dealing with. We're dealing with a circumstance wherein there are at least two people who deserve a fair trial. Trayvon Martin is one of the two people, at least, who deserves a fair trial. He deserves a fair hearing on what happened that day. He cannot speak for himself, but there is evidence that speaks volumes about what happened on this occasion. That evidence has to be considered such that some impartial body can make a determination as to whether or not there should be an arrest.

If there is an arrest--and I believe that the evidence exists such that there is probable cause--if there is an arrest, then there can be a trial and then there can be the transparency that the United States of America produces whenever we have trials, because there will be an opportunity for all sides to present their evidence in a court of law before a jury if a jury is desired. This is the way we do things in the United States of America.

Regardless of his color, he deserves a fair trial. Regardless of what he had on, he deserves a fair trial. And to those who say that hoodies make you a criminal, I say: Be careful, because you're getting dangerously close to saying women can cause themselves to become victims. You're dangerously close, so be careful.

Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

I have an amendment at the desk, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Chairman, I will be very brief because I understand that time is of the essence.

I've had an opportunity to work with my colleagues across the aisle, and our staffs have worked together. Mr. Chairman, this amendment would simply make it clear that the FCC will not be impeded in any way as it relates to notifying the public about dangerous conditions. We all know about the hurricanes that hit the gulf coast and that we have tornadoes in other areas of the country. This is a very simple, commonsense amendment. I believe my colleague will agree with me, and I don't believe there will be a need for a vote.

I yield to the gentleman from Oregon.

Thank you. And reclaiming my time, I am grateful for my colleague and the staff members that worked with us.

And with that said, Mr. Chairman, I don't believe there will be a request for a vote if the amendment is accepted.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to note that I will be yielding 10 minutes of time to my colleague from the Ag Committee, Mr. Owens.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I do want to concur with those who've announced that bipartisanship is alive and well at the committee level and on the floor of this House today. I'd like to thank my colleagues on the other side, Mr. Garrett and Mr. Grimm, for their cooperation and our ability to work together.

I'd also like to especially thank the staff of the full committee and the staff of each congressional office for the outstanding work the staff members have done. It is very difficult to get legislation to this point without the benefit of staff having had a helping hand, and we thank the staff.

Mr. Speaker, the passage of the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 established a system for regulating the over- the-counter--that's the OTC--derivatives market. Authority is provided to the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, and the banking regulators, which have been proposing the regulation that will eventually govern the OTC derivatives market.

Previously, banks and other financial companies were able to amass considerable risk using OTC derivatives without reporting to the regulator or to the public. The Wall Street Reform Act requires that most derivative transactions, primarily those between dealers, now be centrally cleared and exchange traded whenever possible and that all transaction data be collected and publicly reported at clearinghouses or swap-data repositories.

The new rules are intended to allow regulators and the public to better analyze the derivative risk-taking activities of banks and other financial companies. The new rules are not intended to hold in place onerous requirements on companies that use derivatives only as a means to hedge the risk of the company.

H.R. 2682 clarifies Congress' intent when passing the Wall Street Reform legislation by more clearly exempting end-users that are only using swaps to hedge or to mitigate commercial risk.

H.R. 2682 is also consistent with a colloquy between Representatives Frank and Peterson, as well as a letter from Senators Lincoln and Dodd, which noted that the reform legislation provided the regulators with sufficient authority to exempt end-users from the margin requirements.

This bill passed favorably out of both the House Financial Services Committee and House Agriculture Committee with strong bipartisan support. In no way should H.R. 2682 undo any of the important protections of reform legislation. Its purpose is to recognize the end- users' responsibility to use swaps as a part of their businesses.

I congratulate Mr. Grimm and Mr. Peters, and I encourage you to support this bill.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I would simply close by indicating that I concur with my colleagues. This legislation does enjoy the bipartisan support that we believe will help us get a message to our Members that it is a good piece of legislation that should be totally supported by the membership. So, I would ask my colleagues and Members of the Congress to please support this legislation.

I yield back the balance of my time.

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

I thank my colleague, Mrs. Biggert, for her support of this legislation as well as many other pieces of legislation that we've had the privilege of working together on.

Mr. Speaker, I'd like to thank you, as well, for your cosponsorship of the legislation. It means a lot to have bipartisan support for our warriors, those who are willing to go to distant places and risk their lives such that we may have better lives.

Many of them do not return home as they left. Many of them find themselves living on the streets of life. As a result, we believe it's necessary for us to do all that we can to help them secure the kind of homes, the kind of housing, the kinds of services that they need so that they can reintegrate themselves into American life. This bill, the Homes for Heroes bill, will help to some degree with our goals and ambitions of helping them to have a place to call home.

The bill does place a person in HUD whose sole responsibility it will be to monitor homelessness among our veterans. This person is to file an annual report with Congress on the status of homelessness among the veterans in this country and to give us some insight as to how we are progressing in eliminating and abolishing homelessness among our veterans. It's not going to do everything that we need to do, but it is a step in the right direction.

If I may say so, I would like to commend HUD for what has been done thus far, because there is a person who does this sort of thing with HUD currently. But what we're trying to do now is institutionalize the position such that administrations may come and go, but the position will still be there, and our veterans will receive the kind of help that they merit and deserve.

Mr. Speaker, in our country in 2009, approximately 136,334 people who self-identified themselves as veterans spent at least one night in an emergency shelter or a transitional-housing program. That speaks volumes about the amount of work that we have to do.

While 136,000 may not seem like a lot to some people, I contend, if we have but one veteran who is finding himself or herself in transitional housing or sleeping in a shelter or sleeping on the streets of life, I think we have work to do. This bill will help us with our veterans who are doing this, who are sleeping in this transitional housing.

I would also add that our veterans compose about 16 percent of the homeless adults while they are 8 percent of the American population. They are 8 percent of the population, but of those who are homeless, they are 16 percent.

This, of course, is something that we cannot continue to tolerate. So I'm going to beg all of my colleagues: please, give serious consideration to this piece of legislation. It will not break the bank. It may not do all that we'd like to have done, but it's a step in the right direction, and somebody will be helped as a result of what we do today. I beg to my colleagues, please support this legislation.

I thank Mrs. Biggert for the outstanding work that she has done. I again especially thank staffers who worked with us on this piece of legislation. And I can say candidly, Mr. Speaker, that but for the assistance of our staffers, we might not be standing here today. They do make a difference. And I would have the veterans know that behind every Member, we have staffers who are working to help them return to our homeland and reintegrate them into our society.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I would simply close by saying this: Mr. Speaker, thank you again for your support of this legislation. I would hope that my colleagues will give it the kind of consideration that our warriors are giving us when they decide that they're willing to go to distant places and make great sacrifices for us. Please give it consideration.

I yield back the balance of my time.

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

H.R. 4014 is a good piece of legislation, and it is designed to protect proprietary information, which is exceedingly important in the business world. This bill ensures that when an institution submits confidential information to the CFPB, the information will remain confidential. This bill is in line with existing law for other financial regulators.

We have confirmed that the CFPB believes this fix to be acceptable. The bill is identical to legislation introduced by Senate Banking Committee Chairman Johnson and Ranking Member Shelby. This legislation will give financial institutions legal certainty when turning over data to the CFPB.

Mr. Speaker, current law states that a bank does not waive confidentiality and, thereby, should not have to risk its disclosure of information to other parties. These parties are sometimes engaged in litigation against each other. This piece of legislation will assure a party that its information given to the CFPB will not end up in the hands of another party that may be engaged in litigation. This is but one example. This bill is designed to protect proprietary information.

I want to thank my colleague for the outstanding job that he has done in presenting this piece of legislation. I thank Mrs. Biggert for, again, showing the bipartisanship that has helped us to bring this legislation to the floor.

At this time, I will reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I will simply encourage my colleagues to support the legislation.

I yield back the balance of my time.

I yield to my colleague from Florida.

Madam Speaker, I rise this morning to thank the many persons across the length and breadth of this country who have spoken up with reference to the injustice that has occurred in Florida with reference to the young man, Trayvon Martin.

I want to single out two people, however. The first, Joe Scarborough of MSNBC Morning Joe. When he spoke this morning, I literally had tears to well in my eyes as he took a strong position on this injustice. I beg that others would do likewise.

I would also like to thank the Reverend Al Sharpton. He has lost his mother; and I along with other people of goodwill would like to extend our condolences and our sympathies. But I am so grateful to Reverend Sharpton. He has indicated that he will be at the rally tonight in Sanford, Florida. And I thank him for what he has done and is doing.

May God continue to bless you, Reverend, and I look forward to being there with you.

I yield to the gentleman from Michigan.

Mr. Speaker, I am before the House with a very heavy heart. I am very much concerned about the circumstances in Florida involving Trayvon Martin.

We live in a world, Mr. Speaker, where it's not enough for things to be right; they must also look right. And it just doesn't look right for a 17-year-old child to lose his life under the circumstances that have been announced.

I would like to thank all of the many colleagues here for the bipartisan support that has been shown in calling for the Justice Department to investigate. I also thank those who say they support what the Justice Department is doing in terms of an investigation. It doesn't look right, and I believe it is not right.

Mr. Speaker, the Affordable Care Act is styled such for a reason. Let us look back to 2009, at the time we embarked upon passing the Affordable Care Act. At that time in 2009, we were spending $2.5 trillion per year on health care--$2.5 trillion. That is a lot of money, and it

is very difficult to understand $2.5 trillion. Well, $2.5 trillion is $79,000 per second. That's what we were spending on health care, $79,000 per second. I'll be quite candid with you: these numbers are so huge that sometimes I do confuse them myself. That's $79,000 per second.

We were spending 17.6 percent of GDP on health care. It was projected that by 2018, we would be spending $4.4 trillion per year on health care. That would be $139,000 per second. As I said, big numbers. It's hard to always get them correct because they are so huge and they can be confusing. That's $139,000 per second.

We had 45,000 persons per year dying because they didn't have proper health care. We had 21 million people who were working full time and did not have insurance. That is 21 million people. In my State of Texas, 6 million people were uninsured. Twenty percent of the State's children were uninsured. In Harris County in my State of Texas, 1.1 million people were uninsured.

It was time for this Congress to act, and act we did. By passing the Affordable Care Act, we have reduced the cost of health care over the long term. It doesn't happen immediately, because the rising cost, as I've explained to you, was exponentially huge. It was almost unimaginable. To bring it down doesn't mean it comes down instantly, but over the next 20 years we will save a trillion dollars.

Here's what we've done. Aside from lowering the cost, which is important, we also impact lives. Preventive care is there. We also do away with preexisting conditions. For those who did not know, pregnancy is a preexisting condition. We also make sure that women are not discriminated against. Women won't be charged more simply because they are females, because they are women. We equalize health care as it relates to the genders. We close the doughnut hole as it relates to senior citizens. I might also add that in '09, we were spending about $100 billion a year on uninsured persons, much of that in emergency rooms where persons had to go to the emergency room to get the care that they did not have by virtue of not having insurance. They were getting their primary care in emergency rooms. They were also getting their pharmaceuticals through emergency rooms. It was a time to act, and act we did. We passed the Affordable Care Act.

I will close with this. We live in the richest country in the world. One out of every 100 persons is a millionaire. In this country, if you are an enemy combatant and we should capture you and wound you in the process, we will give you aid and comfort. In this country, if you are a bank robber and you're robbing the bank and on the way out we should harm you, when we capture you, we will give you aid and comfort. In this country, if you're on death row and scheduled to meet your Maker next week and you get sick this week, we give you aid and comfort this week and we send you to meet your Maker next week. In this country, if we can give aid and comfort to the enemy combatant, if we can give aid and comfort to the criminal who robs the bank, if we can give aid and comfort to the person on death row, surely we can give aid and comfort to hardworking Americans who do not earn enough to afford insurance.

The Affordable Care Act does this. It does not require people who cannot afford insurance to buy it, but it does say that every person who can should buy insurance.

The Affordable Care Act is making a difference in the lives of people. Children can stay on their parents' policies until they're 26 years of age. This was a good piece of legislation. I supported it then and I still support it now. The Affordable Care Act is affordable, and that is why we passed it.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to give a great expression of gratitude to the Clooney family. Mr. George Clooney and his father, Nick, were among the many who were arrested on Friday, March 16, protesting over at the Sudanese Embassy. I am saluting them, and am grateful to them because not only of what they did that day but of what Mr. Clooney did when he went into Sudan, at some considerable risk I might add, to secure evidence of what was taking place there and what is taking place.

Those who would like to see some of the evidence can go to www.enoughproject.org. You can actually see the video.

I believe what he and those others who were arrested have done merits having a flag flown over the Capitol. We will fly a flag over the Capitol in honor of those who participated in the protest movement.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to announce that I am going to cosponsor H.R. 4169, the Sudan Security, Peace, and Accountability Act.

I'm doing this, Mr. Speaker, because it has been called to our attention that there are atrocities still taking place in Sudan. People are suffering, people are dying, and there is a possibility of a humanitarian crisis developing. This bill will allow sanctions to be imposed.

I would also like to thank Mr. George Clooney and his father for calling these atrocities to our attention.

I hope to say more about this in the days to come.

Thank you, Dr. Christensen. I especially thank you for chairing the Health Care Task Force and for the outstanding job that you've done through the years. You have shown a great deal of dedication to health care for all, and I believe that those who write history will be exceedingly kind to you when they record how you fought so that every person could have health care as a matter of right as opposed to as a matter of wealth. You have done your best to make sure health care doesn't become wealth care.

I would also like to thank my colleague, Sheila Jackson Lee, who spoke just ahead of me and you, for the hard work that she is doing across the length and breadth of this country to help us with these issues concerning health care for all as well.

The Affordable Care Act is called the Affordable Care Act for a reason. In 2009, when we were embarking upon this transformation in health care, we were spending about $2.5 trillion per year on health care. And $2.5 trillion is a huge number. It is very difficult to grasp $2.5 trillion. That $2.5 trillion is about $79,000 per second. That's what we were spending in 2009. That was 17.6 percent of GDP--$79,000- plus per second. And it was projected in 2009 that in 2018 we would be spending $4.4 trillion per year. A big number, $4.4 trillion. How much is it really? That's $139,000 per second, which equates to about 20.3 percent of GDP. That's $139,000 per second.

We needed the Affordable Care Act. In the State of Texas, we were spending huge amounts of money because we had 6 million people who were uninsured--1.1 million in my county, Harris County, uninsured. Twenty percent of the State's children were uninsured. In 2009, we needed the Affordable Care Act. There was a reason why it's called

the Affordable Care Act. Because upon passing it, it's projected still that it will--and this is per CBO--that it will save a trillion dollars-plus over a 20-year period.

This bill, this legislation, reduces the cost of care. It was something that had to be done. But equally as important as reducing the cost of care, it spreads health care, about 50 million people who, but for this bill, probably would not receive some health care. I do believe that it's important that we not have 45,000 people per year die because they don't have insurance. That's a lot of folks who lose their lives. We were losing about one person every 12 minutes, I believe.

This is an important piece of legislation to save lives. It saves money. But equally as important as saving money--in my world, more important--is the fact that it saves lives. It saves the lives of children. It will cause children to have the opportunity to stay on the insurance of their parents until they are 26 years of age.

It closes the doughnut hole for senior citizens with their pharmaceuticals. We had a system that allowed you to pay a copay and a premium up to a certain point, and then you had to pay all of the costs of your health care, and then at another point you would again receive some additional assistance. This bill closes that doughnut hole for those who are in the twilight of life when you need pharmaceuticals the most.

By the way, the insurance companies were not eager to take on persons in the twilight of life when there is much to be spent on health care. They don't go out looking for people to insure in the twilight of life. This bill covers people to make sure they get pharmaceuticals in the twilight of life.

But it does something special for women. It is the discrimination that exists against women who get the same coverage, the same insurance that men get, but pay more because of their gender. There really is a gender bias in the insurance industry, and women pay more for similar coverage. This bill ends it. Women ought not be required to pay more because they are women. This bill ends it.

It also helps us with persons in need of preventive care. And at some point in life, we all need preventive care, so theoretically I suppose it helps everyone. But preventive care is very important. Preventive care can hold down the cost of health care. If you can treat and prevent an illness, you don't pay that inordinate amount of money you have to pay once a person has an illness and has to receive medical attention.

One such area of preventive care has to do with contraception. This is an adult conversation, and I want adults to know that men can receive their contraceptives in their neighborhoods, bus stops and truck stops. They can receive contraceptives. It is easy for men to acquire contraceptives. If men can get them in their neighborhoods, women should be able to get them at Planned Parenthood. There is no reason why men should have easy access and women be denied access. These are matters for families to consider and individuals to make choices about, and I think that women ought to be able to make the same choices that men can make when it comes to contraception.

I would add, as I close, that this bill is going to make a difference in the lives of a lot of people. And what I regret is that many people really don't understand the positive impact that it will have on them. And it's very unfortunate because there are many people who will benefit from this bill but who do not understand how it will have a positive impact on their lives. It is unfortunate that we sometimes don't know as much about a thing as we should so that we can speak about it in terms of knowledge that we have as opposed to what we have heard.

Read the Affordable Care Act. Look at the summaries of it. No one denies--no one denies--that it allows you to keep your child on your health insurance until your child is 26 years of age. No one denies that it is closing the doughnut hole for senior citizens as it relates to their pharmaceuticals. No one denies that it will allow preventive care to take place such that people can receive treatment that will prevent them from having to go to the hospital, to give them an opportunity to remain healthy and not have to treat an unhealthy person. No one denies that it will help keep people out of the emergency rooms.

We were spending $100 billion per year in emergency rooms in '09. People were going to emergency rooms for their pharmaceuticals and their treatments that they could receive at a general practitioner's office. This bill would end this.

This is a good piece of legislation that will help people in the dawn of life when they are born with preexisting conditions and in the twilight of life when they're in need of special attention and treatment that the wealthy can now afford.

I do believe that in this country, if we find you to be an enemy combatant and if we should mortally wound you in the process of taking you into custody, if we should wound you, perhaps not kill you but we wound you when we do capture you, if we don't mortally wound you, if we don't kill you, we will give you aid and comfort. We give aid and comfort to our enemy combatants, people who are trying to kill us. We will give them aid and comfort if we wound them in battle.

In this country, if you are a bank robber and if, on the way out of the bank we should harm you physically when we capture you, we will give you aid and comfort. In this country, we give aid and comfort to criminals.

In this country, if you are on death row and you are on your way to meet your Maker next week, if you get sick this week, we will give you aid and comfort and send you to meet your Maker next week.

If we can give aid and comfort to the enemy combatant, if we can give aid and comfort to the criminal, if we can give aid and comfort to the person who's on death row who's going to die next week, surely we can give aid and comfort to hardworking American citizens who cannot afford health care but for the Affordable Care Act, which, by the way, mandates that every person who can afford health care acquire health care. It does not require people to buy health care who cannot afford health care.

This is the richest country in the world. One out of every 100 persons is a millionaire. In spite of all that you hear, we still are. And in this, the richest country in the world, we cannot allow health care to become wealth care.

I thank you for yielding to me, and I gladly yield back to you.