Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I stand before you today to tell you about a rare disorder known as CDKL5.

Today, June 17, is CDKL5 Awareness Day. This genetic disorder was discovered by genetic markers in 2004. Those impacted usually suffer from seizures and rarely, if ever, walk or talk.

My niece, Catie, is one of only 600 known cases in the world. When Catie was born just 5 years ago, only 200 children had been diagnosed with CDKL5 disorder. Due to the recent discovery of this condition, and its resemblance to Rett Syndrome, epilepsy and autism, it's likely that there are many children who have been undiagnosed or misdiagnosed.

Families are forced to turn to the Internet and the community of parents because even doctors know relatively little about CDKL5. Unfortunately, at this time there's no cure, only hours of therapy, and for many, traveling long distances to specialists. Fortunately, CDKL5 research is taking place.

The children impacted with CDKL5 disorder cannot talk to you about their condition, so the responsibility falls to us to raise awareness.

My family learns something from Catie every day. It's my hope that we can continue to learn more for Catie and the other young people impacted by CDKL5 disorder.

Mr. Chairman, the Guantanamo Bay detention facility was established to hold unlawful enemy combatants captured during the war on terror.

Any proposal to close the Guantanamo detention facility must first clearly address the transfer of remaining prisoners detained there. Many of the remaining detainees are the most hardened terrorists, including those responsible for the 9/11 mass murders of many Americans.

There are three primary options: transfer to another country or transfer to the United States or stay put.

Transferring these terrorists to another country comes with a substantial risk of reengaging as an American threat. The current reengagement rate of former Guantanamo detainees is nearly 28 percent.

I served for 1 year in Iraq with the Army as a medical officer at one of the largest detention facilities there. Often after prison release deals made by entrusted decisionmakers, we saw the same people return for new offenses. Additionally, there were multiple escapes and attempted escapes, as well as attacks trying to free the detainees.

I've been to Guantanamo, and the facilities there are a safe and secure location away from our soldiers on the battlefield. I don't think there are many people in Cuba that are trying to free the people that are held at Guantanamo, and this was not the case in Iraq, and it may not be the case should they be transferred to the United States.

I believe the prisoners at Guantanamo Bay are being treated appropriately and in a way that we can be proud of as a Nation. The hunger strike policy is carried out humanely with the detainees treated as patients. The access to caregivers and medical facilities is the same for our troops as it is for those detained.

Additionally, transfers to the United States would be very expensive. We've already built a courtroom there that cost us in the millions of dollars.

These terrorist detainees pose a very real danger to our security in America. They mean us real harm. The President has the ability to certify transfers of detainees to other countries, but he has yet to do so. And until the President leads with a better solution, I firmly believe that keeping Guantanamo open is our best option, our safest option, and our most logical option.

Mr. Speaker, I had the good fortune of getting to know Ben Gettler during years of pickup basketball games with him.

Ben's philosophy about basketball wasn't too different from his philosophy about life: age is no reason to slow down. Ben was still running a business and two charitable foundations up to his final days with us. He passed away on June 4 at age 87.

Ben grew up during a tumultuous time in our world's history. The experiences of his era imprinted upon him the importance of his heritage and shaped his philanthropic pursuits.

As the president of the Jewish Foundation of Cincinnati, Ben organized a program that helped more young men and women per capita to travel to Israel than any other city in North America.

Ben also gave back to his alma mater, the University of Cincinnati, by serving as the chairman of the board of trustees. Today, Gettler Stadium at the university stands as a tribute to Ben and his wife Dee's service to the University, as well as a reminder of his time in college as an outstanding track-and-field athlete.

A grateful city thanks Ben's wife, Dee, and his children for sharing this energetic and passionate man with our community. The city of Cincinnati is truly a better place because of Ben Gettler. He will be missed, but he will never be forgotten.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 45 to repeal ObamaCare.

Madam Speaker, as a physician, I know our health care system is broken, but this form of Washington meddling only makes it worse. The President's law puts too much control in the hands of the Federal Government, creating a complex system that emphasizes government intrusion over actual patient care.

There is no reason for the IRS to play a role in our health care system, favoring one and punishing another. Medical decisions already cause deep anxiety in the lives of too many Americans. Why compound that with the weight of an audit?

Our goal should be simple: respect you as a patient and connect you to the doctor that you deserve. Patient-centered solutions place you, the patient, at the center of our health care system, simplifying your life, not pushing you to the corner of Big Government sprawl.

Madam Speaker, the American people deserve full repeal.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

I would like to take a little time to discuss a portion of the Affordable Care Act known as the Independent Payment Advisory Board. As you look at this chart, it's one of the agencies that has been developed here on this chart.

I'd also like to point out on this chart that right down here is the physician, and over here is the patient. It seems to me that all we're really trying to do is get the patient to the physician. It behooves me to be able to explain why we need all this in between when we are just trying to get a patient to the physician. I would also like to point out that I think at the center of our health care in America should be the patient, not the Secretary of Health and Human Services.

But let's talk for a minute about the Independent Payment Advisory Board. Who are they? Who are these people? Well, they're actually 15 unelected bureaucrats appointed by the President. To date, as this law is being enacted, no one has been appointed yet.

What do they do? Well, they limit options. They limit care options. They limit access to care. They drive a wedge between the doctor and the patient, and they're responsible for denials of payment for certain types of treatment. I contend to you that really this is a wedge that we cannot afford if we are to have the best health care in the world, which we have been known to have.

I would like to share with you a little story that I experienced in my 26 years as a doctor, as a surgeon. I had a patient who came in one time, and she explained to me that she's had a problem for 10 years. For 10 years she's had a problem, and she's had multiple treatments. She explained to me what those were. Between cortisone shots and physical therapy, she's had previous X-rays, she had paddings and strappings, different things that might put the painful area to rest and make it better, but none of it got better. They were all acceptable treatments, but for 10 years, they failed.

So I said, Well, your X-ray looks normal. Have you ever had an MRI? She said, No. So I said, I don't want to repeat all the things that have failed. Let's go ahead and get an MRI and take a look inside.

Well, later that afternoon, I get a call from the insurance company where I have to speak to a doctor about ordering this MRI. The doctor says to me, Why are you ordering the MRI? I explained it. And he said, Well, you've only seen her one time, so I'm not going to allow it. I'm not going to allow this to be ordered. I said, Well, maybe I've only seen her one time, Doctor, but you haven't seen her at all. You've never seen her. And I said, And you haven't taken the 10-year history that I have taken, and yet you're going to be deciding the care? I said, How can I get this patient to come and see you? The doctor said, Well, you can't do that. I said, Well, what's your specialty? He said, I'm an emergency room doctor. I said, Okay, fair enough. You would probably, in the emergency room then, refer her to a specialist, which is where she is today, and yet you, in your specialty, are denying this care.

I went back and I explained this to the patient. But not until I said to the doctor, I said, I hope this call is being monitored for quality assurance because I want someone to hear what you said to me today.

I went back to the patient and I said, You need to talk to your person at your work, your H.R. person, explain to them that you are being denied care and have them make a call to the insurance company.

Do you know, the next day we got approval for that MRI. I was able to look inside, find out what was wrong and treat this patient, and within 3 weeks, she was better. But the advice from the person who had never seen the patient was, You can't have that MRI.

This is what we are dealing with today. At least in this situation we had the opportunity to have her work call the insurance company and make a case saying, You need to take care of this patient.

But imagine when it is a government agency. What kind of recourse do you think that we will have between the doctors and our patients? At least in this case it was a doctor. The Independent Payment Advisory Board will not be made up entirely of doctors, and they will not have people on there from every specialty with knowledge about everything that comes across medically.

So do we want a third party deciding who gets care? Frankly, I don't think anyone should have the ability to determine someone's care unless they have looked the patient in the eye, they have looked and they've discussed the options, and the patient and the doctor decide together. This is a dangerous course that we're on in America and in Americans' health care.

Just in closing, I would just like to reiterate the importance of decisions being able to be made between a doctor and a patient, because that's what we expect, and that's what Americans deserve in their health care system.

Mr. Speaker, I stand before you today with great sadness. This weekend, the movement on behalf of life lost a passionate leader, Barbara Willke. For over four decades, Barbara and her husband, Dr. John Willke, were an unstoppable force for life. They joined together to author books, craft teaching materials, and give lectures in 64 countries, all to promote faith and sanctity of life. In 1971, they founded Right to Life of Greater Cincinnati, one of the first organizations of its kind. This life-loving organization continues to thrive in no small part due to their efforts over the years.

In addition to being a pioneer of the pro-life movement, Barbara was a nurse, a mother, a foster parent, a

grandmother, and devoted wife. She and John would have celebrated their 65th wedding anniversary this summer. Barbara's influence lives on through the lives she touched, especially those she protected. It's my honor to be one of the many people who will keep her legacy alive by defending our most vulnerable, the unborn, as she did for so many years.

God bless Barbara Willke, and may she rest in peace.

It's that time of year again. Folks back in my district and all across America have had to part ways with our hard-earned money as we send our taxes off to Washington. How long did it take you just to figure out the complicated tax forms and get everything together just to file your returns? It takes the average American 13 hours. Not the best use of your time, is it? But, then, it's not hard to imagine when you consider that our Tax Code contains over 70,000 pages of regulations.

That's not the tax system that our fellow Americans deserve. We need a Tax Code that is fairer and simpler for everyone--families, students, business owners, and all hardworking taxpayers. That's the kind of comprehensive tax reform that the House Republicans want to enact.

Mr. Speaker, in 2008, at 92 years old, Major Tom Griffin stood up at a Veterans Day event in Cincinnati, and he told his story as one of the Doolittle's Raiders that attacked Tokyo after the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor.

Managing to bail out after the attack and making his way to China, Tom returned to the U.S., deployed once again, this time to Europe, and was a POW for almost 2 years. Tom Griffin never said, why me; but, rather, why not me?

Growing up in the Depression, Tom Griffin learned to put service above himself. Over the years, I saw Tom tend to other veterans as they aged, and he was there for their final separation from service on Earth.

Tom Griffin has completed his Earthly mission. However, the positive effects of his work will never perish. But are we worth the sacrifice made by Tom Griffin and so many others?

Will history show that we treasured the gift of freedom that he handed us?

We all need to commit to ensure that Tom Griffin's efforts on behalf of freedom will not have been in vain. May he be able to look down at us and say, well done.

Tom Griffin, you led a good life. You were a good man and the greatest of Americans. Thank you, and God bless you, Tom Griffin.