Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I rise today to lead the 111th Congress of the United States of America in honoring Colonel Van R. Mayhall, USAR (Ret.), on the occasion of his 90th birthday.

Born near Baton Rouge, Louisiana on July 24, 1919, Van Robinson Mayhall has lived in Baton Rouge nearly all his 90 years. In fact, the longest he was ever away from home was while fighting to defend America overseas. Colonel Mayhall graduated from Catholic High School and attended Louisiana State University until the outbreak of World War II. He joined the Louisiana National Guard at age 17, and in December 1941, after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, enlisted in the United States Army. He rose to the rank of Captain in the European Theater, serving as aide to General William Weaver and seeing combat in France and Germany, including the Battle of Hurtgen Forest and the Battle of the Bulge. In recognition of his courageous service in combat, Colonel Mayhall received numerous awards and honors, including the Bronze Star and the Silver Star for his bravery under enemy fire. Colonel Mayhall was honorably discharged from the Army following the war, and his commitment to his community and his country continued. Then-Captain Mayhall remained in the Army Reserves until retirement, achieving the rank of Colonel.

After his five year deployment, he was reunited with his wife, Marie Roques Mayhall, with whom he raised five children, fourteen grandchildren, and two great-grandchildren, with one more on the way. He fully dedicated himself to the Baton Rouge community, volunteering on behalf of his church, military and veterans groups, and charitable organizations. In 1999, his own World War II memoir, Cranking Up A Fine War, was released and received favorable reviews. In 2006, in recognition of an extraordinary lifetime of service and achievements, he was inducted into the Louisiana Veterans' Hall of Honor.

Colonel Mayhall's life is a testament to the spirit of the Greatest Generation. It is also an ongoing tribute to his brothers in arms who never returned home to live the American dream as Colonel Mayhall has. It is a great honor that the position to which I have been elected offers me the opportunity to lead the Congress of the United States of America, on

the occasion of Colonel Van R. Mayhall's 90th birthday, in expressing the respect, admiration and thanks of a grateful Nation for his service to his country, as well as a very happy birthday on July 24, 2009.

Mr. Speaker, critical to health care reform is who has the power. Currently, the payer has the power. Ask a Medicaid recipient if she has the power or the government agency which pays. Ask a patient denied a procedure if he has the power or the insurance company which pays.

Reform must fix what's broken. What's broken is who has the power. Real reform gives the patient the power.

Government already controls 50 percent of health care spending. By controlling dollars, bureaucrats control care.

The President's plan doubles down on government control. It doubles down what is broken. It invests in government, not in patients. How can we trust bureaucracies that broke health care to fix health care? Trust government that always overpromised and underfunded?

Until reform transfers power from payer to patient, there is no reform. Give the power to the patient.

Offered By: Mr. Cassidy

Amendment No. 49: Strike section 212.

Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 332 I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.''

Mr. Speaker, cap-and-trade threatens to be a well- intended disaster. Under the ruse of reducing carbon emissions to clean the environment, cap-and-trade will hobble the economy. By some estimates, it reduces GDP by $9.6 trillion over two decades, eliminates 1.1 million jobs per year, and increases the Federal debt by 26 percent. Electricity rates jump 90 percent, gas prices 74 percent, and natural gas prices 55 percent.

Cap-and-trade is designed to disguise what it truly is, in the words of Mr. Dingell, ``a great big tax.'' It imposes higher taxes on producers, so producers pass higher prices to consumers. The authors are targeting the producers so that the producers increase the prices on consumers. If the authors targeted consumers rather than the producers, it would connect them too much, and therefore, they must distance themselves from the families who bear the costs.

The authors know the effects. They are hiding from them. It is underhanded, it is subterfuge, it deserves to fail.

Madam Speaker, the American Association of Physicians of Indian Origin recently hosted a legislative conference on Capitol Hill, and I was honored to speak to this organization, consisting of proud American doctors who trace their heritage to India. AAPI's members play a critical role in delivering quality health care throughout the U.S. across a broad range of medical specialties.

I heard from AAPI members who discussed the need for health care reform but also shared their concerns about a single-payer system. These physicians told me that while we need reforms, we should never forget that we have the greatest health care system in the world. I agree. We need to find ways to reform health care delivery by cutting costs without compromising the quality of care provided to patients. A system that rations testing, cannot provide the latest pharmaceuticals to patients, and prevents patients from making decisions about their own health care, is a system that moves the power of healthcare from the hands of patients into the hands of government.

That's not what we need in America. I appreciate the advocacy of AAPI on this issue and the difference Indian American doctors make in providing the best health care to their patients every day in our great nation.

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

Mr. Chairman, like many Members of the House, I represent a city with a small hub airport. While multiple airlines provide service at small hub airports, most flight routes have only one airline option. Many of my constituents perceive that this lack of competition creates a higher rate of delayed flights. I share their concern and offer this amendment to require the Department of Transportation to study the issue.

Specifically, the Department would analyze whether the lack of competitive flight options on some routes affects the frequency of delays and cancellations. The Department is already required to report on flight delays and cancellations, and my amendment would strengthen this report.

Mr. Chairman, the availability of competitive options on flight routes is affected by a number of factors which may include industry consolidation and lack of competition on certain routes, as well as the size of the community served.

This amendment would give us greater understanding about the cause of flight delays at small and medium hub airports so that we may continue to improve air service for those communities. I urge adoption of the amendment.

I would yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin.

I yield back.

I thank you.

Today is World Hepatitis Day. This has special meaning for me because I'm a liver doctor, and I've spent 20 years treating hepatitis patients. Three to four million Americans have hepatitis, and about two-thirds of those folks are baby boomers. Maybe it has special meaning for me because I'm a baby boomer, but it also includes firemen, those affected at birth, Vietnam veterans, and many others who are affected by this disease. Indeed, almost every person, almost every family is touched by someone who has liver diseases.

Every year in this country, thousands die from liver disease. We spend, roughly, $30 billion a year treating liver disease, and many more are frightened, even though they shouldn't be, because they know the terrible statistics I just cited. Hepatitis doesn't affect people at the end of life, but rather, it can affect people in the primes of their lives. When it does so, it potentially leaves behind orphans, widows and widowers.

The best of the American spirit is compassion. Public policy should reflect this compassion, and in this case, it will be for our friends, our families and, in my case, my patients touched by hepatitis. Today, on World Hepatitis Day, I ask that we, through public policy, pledge our compassion to those so affected.

Madam Speaker, on rollcall No. 258 I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.''

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor Sue Cary, for her dedication and contributions to nephrology nursing and kidney patients in Louisiana and across the country. Sue is one of my constituents from Baton Rogue and has served as President of the American Nephrology Nurses' Association (ANNA) in 2008 and 2009. Sue has been an active member of ANNA for 24 years--serving in a variety of leadership roles. As ANNA President, she has implemented a broad range of initiatives that will continue to improve care for patients whose lives depend on dialysis and other kidney replacement treatments.

ANNA is one of the largest and most prestigious nursing associations in America. The organization is the recognized leader in nephrology nursing practice, education, research, and advocacy. ANNA's members are registered nurses and health care professionals that care for patients of all ages who are experiencing, or are at risk for, kidney disease.

Approximately 20 million Americans have chronic kidney disease. While African Americans only make up about 12 percent of the U.S., they constitute about 32 percent of chronic kidney disease cases and are 4 times more likely than Caucasians to develop kidney failure.

I urge my colleagues to take advantage of the educational opportunities offered by ANNA to learn more about kidney disease. I believe this information will help our nation better understand the issues facing kidney disease patients and nephrology nurses.

Sue Cary has also recognized the importance of recruiting and retaining nephrology nurses to help ensure the future of the profession. She currently is a key figure in ANNA's annual ``Nephrology Nurses Week,'' a national campaign that recognizes and celebrates the critical role of nephrology nurses in patient care. During another annual ANNA event, Kidney Disease Awareness and Education (KDAE) Week, Sue and other nephrology nurses across the country invite state and federal legislators to visit dialysis units to learn more about kidney disease and treatments in their districts.

Professionally, Sue Cary has worked as a Nurse Practitioner in Louisiana and has served as an Associate Professor, in the Division of Nursing, at Our Lady of the Lake College from 1990-2003. She has also worked as an adjunct clinical nursing faculty member for Loyola University's Registered Nurse (RN) to Bachelors of Science in Nursing (BSN) program, where she was responsible for the clinical component of the programs' ``Community Health Course.''

Please join me in commending Sue Cary for her years of service.

Madam Chair, I speak against the Democrats' budget and for the alternative. Justice John Marshall said that the power to tax is the power to destroy. Now, that power shouldn't be used unless we understand the consequences.

This Democrats' budget taxes without regard to consequences. And I know that because it includes over $30 billion in tax increases on America's energy economy.

Now, what are these consequences? The energy industry, which employs about 320,000 people in Louisiana, will not hire new workers and may have to lay some off. And, because we disincentivized domestic production, America will buy more foreign oil, as opposed to using our own oil, which is produced by American workers.

I offered an amendment yesterday to establish a point of order against tax legislation that would either destroy U.S. energy jobs or increase our dependence on foreign oil, and I was defeated on a straight party-line vote.

The only recourse to save these jobs, which are not for CEOs, but are for people who work on rigs, they're welders, they are pipeline pipefitters. The only way to save these jobs and defend America's energy security is to vote against this Democrats budget.

Mr. Speaker, in times of hardship, leaders must inspire hope; and, to his credit, President Obama inspires hope. But without planning, reason, and a sense of what works, inspired hope can be a hoax. History in economics demonstrates that the path to prosperity is hard work, sound investment, lower taxes, and less debt. Whether in a family business or government, debt imprisons.

In the short term, debt can elevate the standard of living; but if income grows slower than debt, debt destroys that standard of living. And my fear is that the trillions in debt that the President is creating will swallow economic growth and destroy that standard of living. Our economic future will be pawned, our future in debtor's prison.

The President is ambitious and impatient, but I ask that his ambition not deafen him to the lessons of history and economics. I ask him to inspire hope not just for the present, but also for the future.

You're so bitter about that loss, you call me Patrick instead of Cassidy.

I actually teach residents. I'm still on faculty with LSU Med School. It's not accidental that we end up having too few specialists.

For example, just to put the issue into focus, only about 2 percent of medical school grads in 2007 planned to go into a primary care career. That's 2 percent.

Now, it's not accidental why this is. As it turns out, the Federal Government gives more money to train specialists. It gives less to train a generalist and more to train a specialist.

When you're out, reimbursement is less for visits, but more for procedures. So the primary care physician that we don't have enough of gets paid less for the amount of effort he or she puts into their job.

So I say this to say that it's Federal policies that have gotten us here, and there are wise Federal policies that can get us out. But I want to just give a little bit of humility to the people who want to remake our system, assuming that a top-down approach will benefit.

I echo what Dr. Price said--it's better to have that patient in charge of the system. When it's top down, we end up with systems which end up skewing us towards more specialists and fewer generalists. I think if we take history as a guide, we will say that we will be much better if the patient have the power as opposed to CMS or another Federal bureaucracy having the power.

With that, I yield back.

Mr. Chairman, I wish to engage the chairman of Education and Labor in a colloquy.

Mr. Chairman, Teach for America has been in the AmericaCorps program since 1994 and is the Nation's largest professional service corps. This program recruits top college graduates of all backgrounds and career interests to commit to teach for at least 2 years in our Nation's most underserved classrooms.

To date, 20,000 Teach for America corps members have enriched the lives of more than 3 million low-income students in our Nation's lowest performing schools. While only the one in ten Teach for America corps members initially planned on a career in education, two-thirds remain in the field in some capacity. This only goes to further demonstrate the life-changing impact this kind of service can have on an individual.

Teach for America is also experiencing remarkable growth as more and more Americans look to give back to their communities. Applications are up 40 percent this year, with 35,000 people applying to serve through Teach for America alone.

Given this growth and its potential to expand and meet the needs of underserved students across the Nation, is it correct that, under this bill, Teach for America will continue to be eligible under the professional corps' description of the model for funding under the Education Corps or any of the other newly created corps programs under section 122?

I yield to the chairman of the Education and Labor Committee, and ask if this understanding is correct.

I thank the chairman.

Thank you. It is interesting, as you are talking, two things occurred to me. You mentioned how taxes have the ability to create uncertainty.

Now, if we just take this, not from the nationwide but bring it down to a family in Louisiana. This new budget is going to tax oil and gas exploration. Well, it turns out 90 percent of oil and gas is done not by ExxonMobil but by small wildcatters, if you will, and these folks employ about 320,000 people in my State in petrochemical. Now, these are great jobs. These jobs give benefits. They allow people to pay their mortgage. They are not service level in that sense, but they are jobs of the type that you can raise a family.

So earlier we heard our Democratic colleagues speaking about our need for energy independence, and I am struck. I am new here, so I don't quite understand it.

We want energy independence. We want to create good jobs for working

folks with good benefits, help the uninsured, but at the same time we are penalizing a domestic energy industry, which cannot move because it is domestic, which is helping our energy independence and which is creating these jobs.

Yes, sir.

Will the gentleman yield? It is a little bit ironic because I actually think our hopes are bipartisan. Our hopes are that we create jobs for the American people. Let's give it to our Democratic colleagues. They felt like spending this $1 trillion dollars is actually going to stimulate jobs.

Now, as I listened to you, Mr. Pitts, speak about your committee, John Marshall's quote occurs to me, ``the power to tax is the power to destroy.'' I think our function here is actually to connect the fact that we share that hope for more jobs. But our fear is this tax, which is being justified by this deficit spending, will destroy. It will destroy these kind of jobs that we have in Louisiana for folks who may not go to college, but nonetheless are earning $70,000 to $80,000 a year and sending their kids to good schools with good benefits. And we are going to destroy it in the name of creating new jobs. When I was running for office, Congressman Rooney, that was backward logic: Let's destroy in order to save.

The thought also occurs to me that obviously the jobs that are created that do have long-term benefit are created by those small businesses. And so the thought occurs to me, someone said, a commentator of some sort, it is good that the stimulus package is going to have people hire two more, say, police officers. That is good. It helps safety on the street. But two more police officers does not create 10 more jobs. On the other hand, if we can enable that small business, that small business will create 10 more jobs. So, again, it just keeps echoing in my mind, ``the power to tax is the power to destroy.''

And gals.