Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, the United States is on an unsustainable path right now, an unsustainable course with massive debt, trillion dollar deficits going into the out-years, unemployment approaching 10 percent, and this administration, since January of 2009, has enacted $670 billion in gross tax increases with more tax increases planned by this administration and the Democratic leadership of Congress. It's no wonder we have high unemployment and uncertainty all throughout this country with regard to the business climate.

So what can we do? How can we correct this course? How can we restore American competitiveness for the 21st century? Well, I think there are three things we can do. First, let's cut wasteful, massive government spending. Let's give the American public confidence that we can get our fiscal house in order. Let's send a signal to the bond markets and to our foreign allies and competitors that we can act responsibly. Let's lay out a path for entitlement reform, which is causing severe strain on the Federal budget and leading to this deficit spending. Just laying out a corrective path will send a positive signal.

Secondly, we can lower the corporate tax rate to make U.S. companies more competitive globally with regard to our trading competitors. Let's unleash American innovation. Let's get the American companies out there creating jobs again by lowering the tax rate for our corporations. Right now we have the second highest corporate tax rate in the world among industrialized countries. This makes us less competitive. This also means that companies that want to come to the United States and invest to create jobs here also have a high tax burden. So, therefore, if we want to create jobs, let's make this country competitive for investment coming in and for our companies going out to do investment. That's how we will restore job growth in this country.

Also, one of the things we need to do with regard to tax policy is to make sure that we don't doubly tax our companies who are trying to compete against foreign competitors abroad because our companies competing all over the globe also create American jobs. If we doubly tax ours on top of having the second highest corporate tax rate in the world, well, it's no wonder we're not seeing the kind of job growth that is necessary. We're not going to see U.S. companies and the U.S. be competitive in this global market.

And finally, the third thing: let's promote exports. Exports create jobs, good high-paying jobs. Now, the President has announced that his goal, his stated goal during the State of the Union, was to double exports by the U.S. over the next 5 years. Well, let's look at a little bit of history here for a moment. It took us 10 years previously to double exports. It required the completion of a round of negotiations at the WTO. It took implementation of NAFTA and 10 free trade agreements to be implemented to double exports. This administration has offered none of that so far.

We have, currently, three free trade agreements pending that have been negotiated in good faith, and yet this administration and this Democratic Congress has failed to implement these free trade agreements. These are a win for the United States because those countries are already bringing goods into our country; we just have barriers in exporting to theirs. Why not lift those barriers? Implementing these free trade agreements will create good high-paying U.S. jobs.

These three countries--Colombia, Panama, and South Korea--are markets that are ready for U.S. goods and services. So all we have to do is implement these agreements which have been negotiated in good faith. By failure to do this, what we're doing is sending a signal to our competitors and to other countries that the United States does not negotiate in good faith. That's a poor signal to send if we want to be competitive in this global market.

Meanwhile, those three countries I just mentioned, Colombia, Panama-- let's just take Colombia, for instance. The European Union and Canada are both in the stages of implementing free trade agreements with Colombia. And what's happened? We've seen U.S. exports of agriculture products plummet just over the past year. At the same time, the European Union and Canada have also increased their exports to fill that gap. We are losing out. We are losing out on being able to export to Colombia simply because we won't keep our good faith negotiation and implement this agreement.

The President has announced a national export initiative, but yet there have been no substantive steps to move this forward. Why not implement a small business initiative to help our small businesses export to Colombia? That's an immediate way to create jobs.

Mr. Speaker, last week, the nonpartisan Centers for

Medicare & Medicaid Services released an actuarial report that shows that the President's new health care law will increase health care costs over and above what was expected; premiums for families and small businesses will rise beyond what was expected; and access to a physician will suffer for many, many Americans. They also showed that the $500 billion in indiscriminate cuts to Medicare to pay for a new entitlement is a very deep cut that will hurt access to care for many of our seniors. Half of all seniors in the Medicare Advantage program will lose their current coverage. I have 140,000 seniors in my State of Louisiana who depend on Medicare Advantage in rural areas for access to a doctor. They're going to lose that kind of coverage that gives them that valued access to the physician of their choice.

This bill, this law, fails to lower costs. It creates red tape and bureaucracy, and it really does nothing to enhance quality for most Americans.

Mr. Speaker, our country is on an unsustainable path with trillion-dollar deficits annually, continued massive government spending, and an atmosphere of uncertainty as President Obama and congressional Democrats have enacted $760 million in gross new tax increases since 2009, with more tax increases planned. It's no wonder that unemployment remains stubbornly high and economic growth is sluggish. These policies are a threat to U.S. competitiveness.

We need a commonsense policy to promote growth. We need to cut government spending and adhere to a balanced budget. We need to increase U.S.

exports by implementing the three free trade agreements that we've already negotiated. That way, we show that America keeps its commitments. And we need to lower the corporate tax rate so that our U.S. companies can compete against foreign competitors.

These are commonsense policies that will lead to U.S. competitiveness, job growth, and economic growth.

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

(Mr. BOUSTANY asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 4994. This legislation contains provisions that will make tax season a little easier for many American families; and, therefore, it's worthy of my support.

There are some good, bipartisan ideas in this bill. For example, it makes sense to shield employees from burdensome paperwork requirements when they use their employer-provided cell phones to call their spouses to see if they need to pick up milk on the way home. Our colleague from Texas, Sam Johnson, introduced that legislation and at last count it has over 200 cosponsors from both parties.

This bill also includes bipartisan legislation that Chairman Lewis and I introduced to make it easier for taxpayers to enter into offers and compromise with the IRS.

I am glad that our legislation was included in the bill, and I appreciate Chairman Lewis reaching out to me in a bipartisan manner to find ways to make it easier for taxpayers and the IRS to resolve their disputes amicably.

This bill instructs the IRS to notify taxpayers when it discovers evidence that those taxpayers might be victims of identity theft. For example, when criminals attempt to claim tax refunds in the name of a law-abiding taxpayer, amazingly the IRS does not currently notify taxpayers when it discovers suspicious activity conducted in their names. And this bill includes a study on whether the IRS can provide tax refunds on debit cards. That sounds reasonable to me as it could result in more efficient delivery of tax refunds to taxpayers who need their money right away to pay their bills.

For these reasons and more, I am happy to support this legislation today. But, Mr. Speaker, my support for this legislation does not reduce my disappointment in the antitaxpayer legislation that this majority has enacted into law over the last 15 months, nor does it change my belief that we could do much more for hardworking taxpayers.

If we really wanted to do some good for taxpayers today, we might eliminate all the powers given to the IRS under the new health care law, like putting the IRS in charge of enforcing a new requirement that every American family purchase government-approved health insurance; taxing families that don't have government-approved health insurance, at least $2,000 for a family of four; and if the family doesn't pay a tax, allowing the IRS to impose civil penalties and interest, and even confiscate that family's tax refund.

Mr. Speaker, if we really wanted to do some good for taxpayers today, we could make permanent the important tax relief enacted in 2001 and 2003, which provides relief to every American that pays income taxes and which are set to expire at the end of this year. And we could find a permanent solution to the growing reach of the alternative minimum tax, which threatens to engulf millions of middle class families if Congress fails to act. But this bill does not provide such relief for American taxpayers, and so although I think the bill takes some very positive steps, it also represents a missed opportunity.

I intend to support this bill, Mr. Speaker, but I believe we could have and should have done so much more for hardworking Americans who send us here to conduct the Nation's business and who entrust us with such a large portion of the fruits of their labor.

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

Mr. Speaker, at this time, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sam Johnson), a distinguished member of the Committee on Ways and Means.

Mr. Speaker, I now yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Roskam), a distinguished member of the Ways and Means Committee.

Mr. Speaker, as I stated earlier, this legislation contains provisions that will make April 15 easier for American taxpayers, and so I intend to vote for the bill.

Simplifying the treatment of cell phones used by employees, eliminating the 20 percent down payment requirement for offers in compromise, notifying taxpayers of suspected identity theft, and studying whether there are more efficient ways to get tax refunds into people's hands all makes sense and will make a positive difference in people's lives.

But it's also important to recognize what's not this in this bill: Repeal of health care mandates and taxes, protecting taxpayers from automatic tax increases scheduled to go into effect next year, and finding a permanent solution to the ticking time bomb known as the AMT. Hopefully, the majority will listen to the American people and move forward on those priorities so that taxpayers will have an easier time on future tax days.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote for this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I thank Ranking Member Camp for yielding me this time.

We are talking about jobs, and this bill purports to be a job- creation bill, but I have deep reservations about one of the pay-fors in the bill. It is in section 301. It raises $7.7 billion in taxes, and where do these taxes come from? Where does this tax increase come from? Well, it comes from U.S. companies who happen to be headquartered

overseas. What does that mean? These are companies that employ U.S. workers. These are companies that are in every one of our communities that also stimulate business activity that help create jobs in other businesses that affiliate with these and do business with them.

So what are we doing here? We are basically hurting U.S. job growth. We are hurting U.S. workers. Furthermore, this provision would basically abrogate some 60 bilateral tax treaties that we currently have. We know that the Senate has opposed these types of provisions in the past. So why are we doing this?

Secondly, in the course of the hearing, we had the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Tax Policy and she had questions about this approach and said that this was not the preferred approach of the administration and also expressed concerns that this could invite retaliation upon U.S. companies doing business overseas, further hurting U.S. jobs.

Now if we are going to create jobs, let's try to be sensible and make sure that our tax policy is coordinated with trying to create jobs. What do we know about these jobs in the U.S. by these U.S. companies who happen to be headquartered overseas? Well, they pay better wages. In fact, their compensation packages are roughly one-third more. These are high-skilled jobs so why on the one hand do we want to say we are going to create jobs and on the other hand focus on policies that will kill jobs? I just don't understand the logic here, and for those reasons I oppose this bill.

I want to respond to what was just said about these tax provisions, and that is, the previous administration actually wanted to work through these treaties and recognized that there were some problems but did not just simply want to abrogate 60 tax treaties.

Mr. Speaker, we all have compassion for families struggling, those who have lost jobs, those who lack access to health care. We all want to do what's right for our country. We all want to solve these problems. But as I look at this massive, complex and partisan bill, I see premiums continuing to rise for families and abject failure to control health care costs for families and businesses.

I see huge tax increases coupled with irresponsible cuts to Medicare services, all to expand new coverage entitlements where physician access will worsen, continuing to burden our strapped emergency rooms.

Mr. Speaker, frankly, I see a sequel to the modern Greek fiscal tragedy unfolding before us with a potential for default. We have a duty to reform health care, but an obligation to get it right.

Mr. Speaker, I had the great privilege of practicing medicine for 20 years in Louisiana. I was a heart surgeon. I did open heart surgery, critical lung surgery, and I took care of many patients during very difficult times in their lives. And I got to see the wonderful innovation in technology that we were able to use to save so many lives during that time.

As we face a Sunday vote, here we are Friday night, and I have to say that I am deeply saddened because I really fear what is going to happen to health care in the United States if this bill passes. I have heard from many Americans across the country, given my status as a physician in Congress, many, many Americans from all over the country have contacted me and have basically rejected this bill. They are concerned. They are concerned because they will see their premiums rise. Let me explain.

The Senate Democrat bill will increase health insurance premiums for families by up to 13 percent by 2016. What does this mean? For an individual with the lowest cost basic plan, it would cost $300 more in 2016 than if Congress did nothing at all. How about for a family? Families are struggling right now. Well, for a family who got the lowest cost basic plan, it would cost $2,100 more in 2016 than if Congress did nothing at all. Premiums are going to rise.

We don't need an expensive bill to start bringing health care premiums down. All it would take is competition and choice, things that Republicans have promoted. We have written bills that would expand health savings accounts. We would allow folks to buy insurance across State lines, create transparency, and allow small businesses to pool together to get greater purchasing power, just like unions and large corporations do.

That wouldn't cost trillions of dollars to do. Let's just do this. It's easy.

What is going to happen with this plan? Well, it raids the Medicare program by a half a trillion dollars and uses that money to create a whole new entitlement, just like it basically raises taxes by over a half a trillion dollars to create this new entitlement program. What happens with these taxes? These are taxes on businesses and families. These are taxes on innovation in health care. And so the United States may end up losing its innovative edge if we allow this to go forward.

If you look at what's happened over the past 50 years in health care, folks, doctors, nurses have come from all over the world to train in the United States because of our advanced education in health care and in medicine and our advanced technology. Patients come from all over the world because of this great innovation, this great

ability to save lives. And if we tax this, well, we will lose that competitive edge. There is no question about it.

So what happens with this big massive entitlement that is going to be expanded? Well, $434 billion will be used to expand Medicaid coverage. Now, as a physician I know that Medicaid is a deeply flawed program. There are serious problems with this. First of all, it is breaking States' budgets. Secondly, it is a strain on the Federal budget. But what does this really mean for families? Well, families who have Medicaid right now are having a very difficult time getting access to a doctor because the Medicaid reimbursements don't even come close in many instances to meeting the costs. So doctors are not seeing these patients until late in their conditions. They are having to go to the emergency room, when care is much more expensive, they are sicker. And it is just the wrong way to do this. It is not fair for these individuals, these families who are having to do this.

So what does this bill do? It expands Medicaid. Well, I have a problem with this. I think there is a better way to do it. We can expand coverage, meaningful coverage, by increasing competition, as I mentioned earlier, so that folks afford health care insurance. The last thing we want to do is drive up the cost of health insurance. And that is what this bill does.

The other thing this bill does is it increases taxes across the board. I mentioned new taxes on innovation, on pharmaceuticals, on devices that surgeons use in the hospital. You know, your knee replacement, your hip replacement. This is going to hurt innovation, as I mentioned. But there are also new taxes across the board on businesses. We are going to see new Medicare taxes, $210 billion in new Medicare taxes, new taxes on health care benefits, new taxes on employers, and an individual mandate, an individual mandate that is going to have the IRS in everybody's business.

Mr. Speaker, we have a duty to do health care reform, but we have an obligation to get this right.

Mr. Speaker, tomorrow Ambassador Kirk will meet behind closed doors with the House Ways and Means Committee. While I appreciate the meeting, why do congressional Democrats refuse to talk in the open about creating jobs through international trade? I am encouraged by the administration's newfound openness to promoting American goods and services overseas, but the current situation is bleak. Nearly one in 10 Americans who want work cannot find a job.

The recent economic downturn erased the certainty many families came to rely on, and now they turn to Washington for solutions. Unfortunately, a health care overhaul with new mandates, energy taxes that will drive up input costs, and a massive Tax Code full of quirks and loopholes add to their doubts. To truly grow American jobs, entrepreneurs and businesses need new markets where they can compete to sell their products. We must restore American competitiveness to create new jobs and a prosperous future.

With 95 percent of the world's consumers living outside the United States, our ability to compete fairly and successfully in these markets is vital to our long-term economic growth and security. As the President said last week, ``We need to compete for those customers because other nations are competing for them.''

Today almost one in five U.S. jobs is supported by international trade. I welcome President Obama's lofty goal of doubling U.S. exports in the next 5 years through his National Export Initiative, and I look forward to discussing his plans with Ambassador Kirk.

As our economy continues to struggle, it is evident Americans will not be able to consume their way out of this recession, so we must focus on getting our products and services to emerging markets around the world. American ingenuity, creativity, and innovation can spur new jobs and new factories all right here at home.

According to the Obama administration, increasing trade by merely 1 percent would create 250,000 jobs, a significant start to helping Americans find work. Passing the Colombia, Panama, and South Korea Free Trade Agreements would accomplish just that, increasing our trade exports by 1 percent and creating an estimated 250,000 Americans jobs. These free trade agreements put American workers on a fair footing with workers in those countries instead of alienating our global trading partners through narrow-minded policies such as Buy American.

Now American-produced goods face substantial tariffs in Colombia, Panama, and South Korea, while many goods produced in those countries have no tariff at all when sold to the U.S. The President's goal is ambitious, so passing these three free trade agreements is an important first step to restoring American competitiveness in global markets.

The last time the U.S. doubled its exports, it took nearly 10 years: final implementation of the North American Free Trade Agreement, nine bilateral free trade agreements, and the successful conclusion of the Uruguay Round. Since 1994, Louisiana has increased its exports to NAFTA countries by 271 percent. As a result, thousands of Louisiana workers have job stability, but we can do much more.

Trade creates good-paying jobs for millions of Americans, and leveling the playing field abroad increases our opportunities. Truly supporting American workers and creating new jobs will not be accomplished by closing our doors to the rest of the world while they continue to strike new deals and expand their exports. Now is the time to reach and to work with our allies

and major trading partners. American leadership is in jeopardy, not because of a rising power but because of a shrinking level of American engagement. The world will not wait for us to wake up and realize the opportunities out there. That is why we need to act on expanding these trade agreements.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of LSU and its many achievements over the last 150 years.

As a graduate of LSU medical school, I can attest to the excellence and professionalism of the faculty and to the spirited campus atmosphere that is rivaled by few in the world.

LSU continues capturing the hearts of its students just as it was since it first opened its doors in 1860. It is a place with a unique culture, rich in tradition and quality. Originally serving as a war college, LSU has grown into the flagship university of Louisiana.

Through its seven institutions of higher learning, as well as its distinguished faculty, LSU prepares countless students for the careers of distinction in Louisiana and around the world. LSU also celebrates a number of athletic achievements, including football, baseball, and track and field national championships.

In addition to its academic and athletic successes, the LSU system goes above and beyond to serve the people of Louisiana. From its tireless efforts in the aftermath of the 2005 hurricanes to its various community outreach programs, LSU makes a great deal of difference in the many communities it serves.

Throughout the years, LSU has persevered to become one of the leading educational institutions in the country. It continues to uphold excellence at every level and sets a very worthy goal of reaching the upper level of national prominence by the end of 2010.

It is my pleasure to recognize Louisiana State University and join with the thousands of current students and alumni to celebrate 150 years of excellence. Geaux Tigers!

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I might consume.

(Mr. BOUSTANY asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Like all my colleagues here in the House of Representatives, I was shocked and horrified by the tragedy that occurred at the IRS office in Austin, Texas, on February 18. I especially want to offer my condolences to the family of Vernon Hunter, who lost his life in this senseless attack. Mr. Hunter dedicated his life to serving his country, including 20 years in the U.S. Army and two tours in Vietnam. I stand with my colleagues today to honor his service and his memory.

We should also recognize the courage and heroism of those men and women, including IRS employees, first responders, and others, who responded to the attack to ensure that our country did not suffer even greater losses.

I would like to associate myself with the words of President Obama to the employees of the IRS when he said, and I quote, ``I am thankful for your dedication, courage, and professionalism as we rebuild in Austin. And as you continue your work, we will do what is needed to ensure your safety. We are grateful for your service to this country. May God bless you and the United States of America.''

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, now I would like to yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. McCaul) in whose district this tragic event occurred.

Madam Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend and colleague Mr. Cao for giving me time and for bringing this resolution to the floor which I wholeheartedly support, congratulating the New Orleans Saints for winning Super Bowl XLIV and bringing this long overdue NFL championship to south Louisiana.

You know, I was talking to some businessmen back home in my district who told me after the victory that they're starting to see out-of-state business opportunities come up as a result of the new-found spirit that's come about following this great Super Bowl victory, and it's a wonderful thing for Louisiana.

After 43 years without reaching the Super Bowl, the Saints did it. They finally did it, and it's been a great victory for all of us. It's great for our State. Leading that charge was Super Bowl MVP quarterback Drew Brees, who completed 32 out of 39 pass attempts for 288 yards, two touchdowns. And Louisiana native Tracy Porter, whose 74-yard interception returned for a touchdown sealed this game.

But I am really especially proud of one player from my district. He is a graduate of Opelousas High School, wide receiver Devery Henderson. He is in his sixth season with the Saints. He caught 68 passes for 867 yards this year and four touchdowns, and he played a key role on offense in the Super Bowl, catching seven important passes for a total of 63 yards.

This is truly a very special occasion for the Who Dat Nation, all of our Saints fans in Louisiana and around this great country. We want to honor Sean Payton for his genius and what he has brought to the Saints organization, and for the entire Saints family, the organization, for what they've done for New Orleans and the rest of the Saints. We are exceedingly proud of what has happened. We commend the families and the players, the coaches and the support staff and the loudest and most loyal fans of all, the Who Dat Nation.

Mr. Speaker, this week debate continues in the Senate over a massive health care overhaul. What's at stake for seniors? Many seniors will probably see their benefits cut or higher premiums. The Senate bill cuts more than $135 billion from hospitals serving seniors. It cuts $40 billion from home health agencies, $15 billion from nursing homes, and nearly $8 billion from hospices--an all-important service our seniors depends on.

Seniors deserve to know how Washington Democrats are going to pay for their massive new government-run bureaucracy because cuts like these will affect their care.

As a heart surgeon, I know that we can do better. We need to work together to strengthen Medicare, putting it on sound footing to ensure that it will be there when seniors need help with their health care costs.

We need to lower health care costs for seniors and all Americans by increasing competition in the insurance marketplace, promoting wellness programs, and limiting frivolous lawsuits in medicine. We can accomplish these commonsense solutions if we work together.

Let's protect seniors. Let's protect Medicare.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my deep concern about gulf coast disaster relief left out of this bill.

Yesterday I offered an amendment at the Rules Committee to extend important tax provisions, tax relief provisions, to help gulf coast residents rebuild after the 2005 hurricanes. It's disappointing yet again that the majority is bringing this bill to the floor under another closed rule, prohibiting amendments to be debated.

The economic downturn complicated gulf coast recovery and jeopardized the effectiveness of Katrina and Rita aid. Residents need more time to fully utilize existing disaster assistance programs before they expire.

Congress should extend the GO Zone low-income housing tax credit for an additional year. At risk, currently at risk, are nearly 70 affordable rental housing projects encompassing over 6,000 units along the gulf coast. These projects take time, and this important extension will give investors and developers the confidence to move forward on these very important projects.

Congress should also make disaster-related low-income housing tax credits eligible for the new exchange grant program. This will provide immediate relief to disaster-impacted States as the market for housing tax credits rebounds. The bill also cuts short tax incentives for businesses to invest in the hardest-hit areas along the gulf coast through the special depreciation rules that promote economic development.

My amendment would extend the GO Zone 50 percent first-year bonus depreciation through 2010, bringing new capital to communities struggling to recover. They were hit twice, I mean, hit basically by hurricanes and now the economic downturn.

Look, gulf coast residents are resilient. They are working hard to rebuild, and Congress shouldn't pull the plug on existing disaster programs just as they are starting to make a difference.

What folks need is certainty. Businesses need certainty, and what they are seeing is nothing but uncertainty coming out of Washington. This is not the way to stimulate a recovery, whether it's from hurricanes or from this economic disaster we are facing. We need certainty.

Mr. Speaker, as a physician I know directly about access problems that our seniors are having. Clearly we must protect seniors' access to physicians of their choice. I also know directly about the flawed formula for physician reimbursement. We all want to deal with it.

What we need to do is repeal the flawed SGR formula and replace it with a more equitable reimbursement for physicians that is paid for. This bill ignores over $200 billion in added deficit spending. It continues the same price-controlled formula for physicians. And it does not eliminate--let me repeat--it does not eliminate the tendency for physician cuts. Instead of providing a realistic, long-term solution, this bill spends borrowed money and basically increases the Medicare shortfall by $1.9 trillion.

I urge my colleagues, let's get real about this. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this bill. Let's support a real solution that protects patient access to a physician of their choice. Let's support a real solution that's honest with physicians and treats them fairly, and a solution that avoids massive debt passed on to our children and grandchildren.

Vote ``no'' on this bill.

Mr. Speaker, today we will have a vote on a flawed, massive, and irresponsible health care takeover by government, pushed by Speaker Pelosi and House Democrats, that will cost more than $1 trillion. This bill will increase health care costs for most Americans, increase taxes while Americans struggle to find work, and hurt seniors' quality care.

Mr. Speaker, as a heart surgeon, I saw the amazing innovation in my 20 years in practice in our system. In fact, in the early 1950s, an American surgeon, hopelessly observing the death of a patient from blood clots to the lungs, was inspired and invented the first heart- lung machine that made open heart surgery possible. Many thousands of patients worldwide have benefited from this innovation, this innovation right here in the United States, innovation that will be stifled by the Pelosi health care bill.

There is another way. We can do better. House Republicans have solutions that will lower costs by creating real choice and competition. We will help those with preexisting conditions to get meaningful health care coverage, we will preserve U.S. leadership in medical innovation and education, and we will reduce frivolous lawsuits in medicine that needlessly drive up the costs for families.

As a heart surgeon, I know that we can achieve real health care reforms to bring down costs. But the Democrats' current bill will only lead to higher costs for millions of Americans and destroy what is currently working in our system.

There is a better way. There is a different way. There is a way to lower health care costs, help more people achieve a high quality doctor-patient relationship in this country and improve health care for all Americans.

Vote down this bill and support the Republican plan.