Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Mr. Gary Barrigar, who is stepping down as president of the Boone Watershed Partnership, which he has served since 2005. Through both his work with the Partnership and as a schoolteacher, Gary has made incredible contributions to his East Tennessee community.

As a science teacher who was in the classroom for 38 years at Elizabethton High School, Gary headed the award-winning Elizabethton High Ecology Club. He has also been an integral part of numerous organizations that protect the environment and outdoor areas that we East Tennesseeans hold so close to our hearts.

Gary has made it his life's mission to increase water quality awareness and help preserve local rivers and streams--something

that all of us in East Tennessee are the better for.

I commend Gary for his selfless contributions to East Tennessee and its water resources and wish him the best as he transitions into this new stage in life.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I rise today to urge my colleagues to vote for repeal of the Affordable Care Act. As a physician, I've taken care of families for more than 30 years. During my time on the front lines, I watched our health care costs skyrocket and our health care freedom erode. I observed three major problems with the health care system. One, it costs too much. It's unaffordable for too many people. Two, there were people who didn't have access to care. And three, there's a liability crisis in this country.

The problem is too much government, so more government is not the solution. Unfortunately, the President and his party did not learn the lessons of Tennessee. In Tennessee, it began with universal coverage in the nineties called TennCare. And in 10 short budget years, Mr. Speaker, I saw our costs triple from $2.5 billion a year to $8.5 billion a year. I saw access for patients go down and the quality of their care go down.

The Affordable Care Act applies this same failed idea to the whole country through a 2,700-page bill and more than 13,000 pages of rules-- and still writing. The Affordable Care Act doesn't address the major problem, which is cost. And it's also going to cost jobs.

I spoke to a business owner in Tennessee just this afternoon who has 800 employees. He said his H.R. people looked at this plan. He's going to have to lay off 50 people, put 150 people on part-time work, and possibly close some of his stores.

We need to create an economic environment that creates jobs. The last Congress passed legislation that would destroy jobs. And make no mistake, our health care system was fundamentally flawed before the Affordable Care Act was signed into law. But the Affordable Care Act made a bad situation, I believe, worse. The fact is we don't have free- market medical care today. About half of all the health care bills are paid by government.

But that aside, with all the court cases, the policy proposals, the statistics, it's still important to remember that health care is about human beings. It's about people. There are no Republican or Democrat heart attacks. I've never seen one. I've never operated on a Republican or Democratic cancer in my life. So we need to talk about solutions in a bipartisan way for everyone. Health care is too important to be left to insurance bean counters and to Washington bureaucrats. Government always makes things more expensive and eventually leads to shortages, to long waits, and to rationing.

Let's just talk about a few ideas of what we should do next. Let's start by just leveling the playing field and give all individuals the same tax break that businesses get right now. Just treat an individual like a business. Let's start by empowering our seniors and saving Medicare by giving them choice. Let's allow small businesses to join together to compete for more affordable insurance just like big corporations do.

And let's lower prescription costs by allowing folks to buy medicines anywhere in the world that's safe. Let's reform medical malpractice. Finally, let's force insurance companies to compete for your business across State lines.

Health care freedom is about the right incentives and personal empowerment, not government mandates and regulation. I strongly encourage a ``yes'' vote for this bill.

Mr. Speaker, next week the Supreme Court is expected to rule on the constitutionality of President Obama's health care law.

While we don't yet know the outcome, there are things that we do know. We know that no matter what happens, you'll still be able to see your doctor, the emergency room will still treat you if you're in an accident or have a problem, and the pharmacy down the street will fill your prescription.

We know that the American people don't want government bureaucrats making their health care decisions, but they do want us to address real problems like skyrocketing costs of care or the challenges that many people are having of finding a physician.

We all know this law must be repealed. In its place, we must adopt reforms that will lower the cost of care, increase access, and enhance the quality. This must be done in a transparent, bipartisan way.

No matter what the Ccourt determines, our work here has just begun. As representatives of the American people, we have a responsibility to fix health care in the right way.

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 4480.

The average American family buys 1,100 gallons of gasoline per year. If the price of gas fell just $1 from the current national average of $3.49, families would save $1,100 a year.

For far too long, this administration has prioritized politics over the needs of the American people, and today in this body we have an opportunity to work together and do what's right for the future of this country. The Domestic Energy and Jobs Act will help ease the pain at the pump, create jobs, and push this country towards energy independence.

This commonsense legislation would put several costly and potential burdensome EPA regulations on hold while an analysis of the potential costs and consequences of these rules is

done. To me, it is unthinkable that we wouldn't ask agencies to consider the impact of a regulation on jobs and the economy, particularly at a time of such economic uncertainty.

To boost our energy production, the Domestic Energy and Jobs Act will require the Secretary of the Interior to act on oil and natural gas lease applications and will cut red tape on opening up new reserves in Alaska. This legislation would also restrict the Strategic Petroleum Reserve from being tapped unless the administration develops a plan to explore for additional sources of oil.

Let me put this in perspective. As a young Army officer in Korea in 1973 and 1974, there was an oil embargo. OPEC cut off oil production and sending it to the U.S. We only got heat 3 hours a day. We had to keep the heat for our tanks and our aircraft to protect this Nation. So it is one of strategic importance, and energy is a very important source of that.

To obtain energy independence is not only a key component to our domestic recovery, but it's also an issue of national security, as I just mentioned. Becoming energy independent is far too important for the future of this country to continue to put politics above people.

I encourage my colleagues to join in supporting the Domestic Energy and Jobs Act.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of designating June 20, 2012 as American Eagle Day and celebrating the recovery and restoration of the bald eagle, the national symbol of the United States. On June 20, 1782, the eagle was designated as the national emblem of the U.S. by the Founding Fathers at the Second Continental Congress.

The bald eagle is the central image of the Great Seal of the United States and is displayed in the official seal of many branches and departments of the Federal Government.

The bald eagle is an inspiring symbol of the spirit of freedom and the democracy of the United States. Since the founding of the Nation, the image, meaning and symbolism of the eagle have played a significant role in art, music, history, commerce, literature, architecture and culture of the United States. The bald eagle's habitat only exists in North America.

Over the years, several members of Congress have introduced and passed resolutions in support of the designation of American Eagle Day. My friend and colleague, Senator Lamar Alexander has introduced the same resolution for this year and I support his efforts.

I hope my colleagues will join in celebrating tomorrow, June 20, 2012 as American Eagle Day, which marks the recovery and restoration of the bald eagle.

Mr. Speaker, I was not present for votes on June 18, 2012 because I was attending a funeral. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall votes No. 379 and No. 380.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the rule and underlying H.R. 436, the Protect Medical Innovation Act. This bill will make a positive impact in two critical areas: jobs and innovation.

For 40 consecutive months now, unemployment has exceeded 8 percent. Just last week, we received the unwelcome news that unemployment had increased in May from the prior month. We're on the wrong track, and the medical device tax included in the Affordable Care Act will make a bad situation even worse.

According to one industry study, the 2.3 percent medical device tax could result in the loss of 43,000 American jobs, and this is just outrageous. We should be taking steps to create good-paying American jobs, not preserving a tax hike that would ship these jobs overseas.

Let me just put that in perspective, Mr. Speaker. I have a unique observation point as a physician in practice for over 30 years, and let me take you through some innovations that I've seen.

In 1974, I learned how to do laparoscopy, which is where you place a scope inside the abdomen and look, just observe. And that's really about all we could do.

I remember, 1986, my partner and I did the first ectopic pregnancy. That's a tubal pregnancy, where pregnancy has occurred in the fallopian tube, and we were in there trying to get this pregnancy out through a scope. We did not have the equipment to do it.

Today you can take an ultrasound, diagnose this before rupture; and before, most of these were diagnosed after rupture, required blood transfusions, an open laparotomy, and days in the hospital. Today, I'm happy to report that we diagnose almost all of these before they rupture. We take a simple scope, with the new equipment and devices that have been discovered and utilized and developed, remove this, and send the patient home within hours.

I've watched, now, this go from just a rudimentary observation to incredible surgery with the new Da Vinci device--we're able to do very complicated pelvic surgery, prostate cancer surgery, other abdominal surgeries, heart surgeries--that have done many things, have reduced suffering, lowered morbidity, mortality, and we certainly do not need to go in a different direction.

Let me give you a very personal example that happened to me just 8 or 9 months ago.

In September of 2011, I was walking through the airport in Charlotte, North Carolina, when a gentleman arrested. If it had not been for an AED, a medical device, this gentleman would not be here with his family today. We were able to resuscitate him and send him successfully home to his family.

We do not need to decrease this innovation. I've seen absolutely spectacular things that have occurred over the last 30 years.

Also, this legislation is very simple. It does two other things. It allows an individual to use their HSA, which I have, to buy an across- the-counter medication instead of coming to my office, the most expensive entry point into the health care system other than the emergency room, to get a prescription. It's counterproductive. It wastes time for the patient and their families.

I also would certainly support the FSA agreement for letting someone keep $500 of their money.

And letting that individual and that family roll it over so they can use it the next year. Three very simple things and I will close.

Regardless of what you believe in the Affordable Care Act, or how you believe, I urge my colleagues to support this. And I find it a little bit comical that we are fussing about a closed rule on these three simple items when we discussed a 2,700-page health care bill on a closed rule.

Mr. Speaker, on May 30, 2012 I was recorded as voting ``no'' on rollcall No. 303, the Franks amendment to H.R. 5854. I intended to vote ``aye'' and would like that to be noted in the Record.

I rise today to honor Eagle Scout Ralph Boys, aged 93, who has finally been recognized for attaining the rank of Eagle Scout in the Boy Scouts of America 78 years after meeting the requirements for this distinguished rank.

Ralph had met all of the requirements for the rank of Eagle as a sophomore in high school in 1933, but his family relocated, and he was never able to appear in his Court of Honor to receive his badge. After college, Ralph enlisted in the Army and served many assignments throughout his military career, including on General Douglas MacArthur's headquarters staff during the Philippine campaign of World War II. After the war, Ralph served at posts in Germany, Vietnam, and the Pentagon, retiring as a lieutenant colonel in 1967.

After his retirement, he began a search to find the records of his qualification for the rank of Eagle. After several dead ends and ultimately finding that the last of his scouting records had been consumed in a fire several years earlier, he went through the requirement list with a family friend and found that Ralph's merit badges and military career of 28 years more than qualified him for the distinguished rank.

On December 22, 2011, Ralph became the third generation of his family to receive Scouting's highest honor. He had been preceded by his son, Dr. John Boys, and by his twin grandsons, John Franklin and Austin.

As an Eagle Scout myself, I would like to welcome Ralph to the ranks of Eagle Scout. Congressman Mick Mulvaney also asked to associate himself with these remarks.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor University of Tennessee women's basketball coach Pat Summitt for her hard work, courage, and perseverance. Pat, like me, is from Clarksville, Tennessee. We share a love for basketball, and it has been an honor to watch her lead the Lady Vols for nearly forty years. Pat's commitment to excellence has resulted in almost 1,100 wins, making her the winningest basketball coach in NCAA history.

What is most impressive about Pat isn't her .840 winning percentage or her her eight national championships. Nor is it her ability to run laps with, and sometimes around, her teams, or the intense stare that I am sure is still burned into the minds of some of the ladies on her 1974 inaugural team. What impresses me most about Pat is the way she does everything in her life with heart and to the best of her ability. When she announced her condition last August, I was impressed both by her courage to fight Alzheimer's in a very public way, as well as her leadership in founding the Pat Summitt Foundation Fund. According to the Alzheimer's Association, 5.4 million Americans are currently living with Alzheimer's. By sharing her story, Pat has undoubtedly helped to bring awareness to this disease. I'd be one sorry fan if I didn't also point out that, despite her condition, last season Pat still led the Lady Vols to the NCAA tournament.

Pat Summitt has left the UT community with an amazing legacy and I have no doubt she will continue to faithfully serve the University in her new role as head coach emeritus. I also look forward to seeing great things from her son, Tyler, as he follows in his mother's footsteps. My thoughts and prayers are with Pat and Tyler as they move forward on this journey together.

I thank the chairman.

Mr. Chairman, when President Obama released his nearly $4 trillion budget proposal in February, he called for more spending, more borrowing, and more taxes. Despite a national debt that's grown to more than $15.5 trillion, the President elected to double down on the same old failed agenda.

The Senate has failed to pass a budget for more than 1,000 days--the IPAB wasn't on the margin when they had a budget the last time in the Senate--while House Republicans are actively working to address the economic crisis facing our country.

Americans deserve better than empty promises from a broken government, and the Path to Prosperity budget offers a tangible way forward. This budget cuts spending in a meaningful way, lowers tax rates while simplifying the Tax Code, and strengthens the social safety net.

I ask the Senate and House Democrats, what's your plan? There is no greater contrast between the President's budget and our Republican budget than on Medicare--something I know something about having practiced medicine for 30 years. The President and congressional Democrats cut $500-plus billion from Medicare to fund a new entitlement, and then their cost controls were a 15-member board, a bureaucratic board--basically a denial-of-care board.

No one argues that Medicare goes bankrupt in the near future, so doing nothing is not an option. Republicans propose to strengthen Medicare for current seniors by making no changes for those 55 and older, and giving future retirees the ability to choose their own health plan--what a novel idea that is--including a traditional Medicare choice, the same thing they have today. By implementing these commonsense reforms, we can ensure Medicare will be available to current and future generations.

I am very proud of my colleagues on the House Budget Committee who have worked tirelessly to draft a blueprint that sets our Nation on a path to balancing the budget and paying off the debt. This proposal protects the country, saves Medicare, and puts America on the path to prosperity.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the motion to recommit and strongly support H.R. 5.

Mr. Speaker, 2\1/2\ years ago in this body, we debated the Affordable Care Act, and I remember being part of that debate here on the House floor. Part of that debate was to increase access for American citizens and to maintain the physician-patient relationship.

I have a letter here that was signed by 75 of us, both Democrats and Republicans, opposing, in part, because in the House version of the Affordable Care Act the Independent Payment Advisory Board was not there.

This bill is very simple. H.R. 5 is to repeal the Independent Payment Advisory Board and to vote for malpractice reform, a very simple bill, one that should be easy to support. Let's just discuss and see what occurred.

Based on the Independent Payment Advisory Board--most seniors don't

know about this--after the $500 billion has been taken out to pay for a new benefit. The Independent Payment Advisory Board are 15 unelected bureaucrats, appointed by the President and approved by the Senate to oversee Medicare spending.

Why does this bring angst to a physician? I practiced medicine for 31 years in Tennessee. My concern is I've already seen two examples of this, and this will be the third.

The first is a sustainable growth rate, a formula based on how to pay doctors in Medicare. This was established in 1997. Each year--almost every year since then--the Congress has had the ability to change this because, why? We were afraid if reimbursements to physicians were cut, access to our patients would be denied.

Let's look at what's going on right now.

Two weeks ago in this body, we extended the SGR for 10 months, preventing a 27 percent cut to physicians. Well, as a doctor, what would this mean for me in providing care for my patients? Well, what this would mean is you couldn't afford to see the patients. With IPAB, a formula based on spending, not quality or access, what would happen, I believe, is that this would occur, this 27 percent--at the end of this year, a 31 percent cut, which would be catastrophic for our Medicare patients.

So it's a very simple bill. We don't want Washington-based bureaucrats getting in between the physician-patient relationship. Medical decisions should be made between not an insurance company, and certainly not 15 unelected bureaucrats in Washington. It should be made between a patient, the doctor, and that family.

The second part of this bill, very simply, is medical-legal malpractice reform.

When I began my medical practice in Tennessee, my malpractice premiums were $4,000 a year. When I left 4 years ago to come to Congress, $74,000 a year. During that time, from 1975 until I left to come here, there's basically one insurance company in Tennessee, and over half the premium dollars that were paid during that time went to attorneys, not to the injured party. Less than 40 cents of the malpractice premium dollar in that State have gone to people who have actually been injured. It's a very bad system.

The tort system we have for medical liability now is a very bad system. It needs to be reformed. No one has ever argued about paying actual damages. No one has ever argued about paying medical bills. It's the unintended consequences of this bill that have run the cost up at no value to patients.

I strongly encourage my colleagues to support this bipartisan bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Congress of the United States,

Washington, DC, December 17, 2009.

Hon. Nancy Pelosi,

Speaker, House of Representatives, Capitol Building,

Washington, DC.

Dear Madam Speaker: In July, 75 members of the U.S. House

of Representatives wrote to express strong opposition to

proposals, such as the ``Independent Medicare Advisory

Council (IMAC) Act of 2009'' and the ``Medicare Payment

Advisory Commission (MedPAC) Reform Act of 2009'' (H.R. 2718,

S. 1110, S. 1380), that would divest Congress of its

authority for Medicare payment policy and place this

responsibility in an executive branch commission or board.

This letter clearly stated opposition to the inclusion of

these or any other similar proposals in health reform or any

other legislation, but with recent developments, we, the

undersigned members, believe it is imperative to restate our

strong opposition to any proposal or legislation that would

place authority for Medicare payment policy in an unelected,

executive branch commission or board.

Consistent with the July letter, on November 7, 2009, the

House passed the ``Affordable Health Care for America Act''

(H.R. 3962) did not include provisions to create an unelected

Medicare board. Yet, at present, the Senate is considering

the ``Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2009,''

which includes provisions to create an ``Independent Medicare

Advisory Board'' (IMAB) that would effectively end Congress's

authority over Medicare payment policy.

To create an unelected, unaccountable Medicare commission

as envisioned in the Senate's IMAB proposal would end

Congress's ability to shape Medicare to provide the best

policies for beneficiaries in our communities around the

country. Through the legislative process, and from Medicare's

beginning, Members have been able to represent the needs of

their communities by improving benefits for seniors and the

disabled, affecting policies that fill the health care

workforce pipeline, and ensuring that hospitals are equipped

to care for diverse populations across our individual

districts. Such a responsibility is one that is not taken,

nor should be given away, lightly.

These proposals would severely limit Congressional

oversight of the Medicare program, and to place this

authority within the executive branch, without Congressional

oversight or judicial review, would eliminate the

transparency of Congressional hearings and debate. Without

the open and transparent legislative process, Medicare

beneficiaries and the range of providers who care for them

would be greatly limited in their ability to help develop and

implement new policies that improve the health care of our

nation's seniors. An executive branch Medicare board would

also effectively eliminate Congress's ability to work with

the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to create and

implement demonstration and pilot projects designed to

evaluate new and advanced policies such as home care for the

elderly, the patient-centered medical home, new less invasive

surgical procedures, collaborative efforts between hospitals

and physicians, and programs designed to eliminate fraud and

abuse.

The creation of a Medicare board would also effectively

eliminate state and community input into the Medicare

program, removing the ability to develop and implement

policies expressly applicable to different patient

populations. Instead, national policies that would flow from

such a board would ignore the significant differences and

health care needs of states and communities. Geographic and

demographic variances that exist in our nation's health care

system and patient populations would be dangerously

disregarded. Furthermore, all providers in all states would

be required to comply even if these policies were detrimental

to the patients they serve. Such a commission could not only

threaten the ability of Medicare beneficiaries, but of all

Americans, to access the care they need.

Finally, as the people's elected representatives, we much

oppose any proposal to create a board that would surrender

our legislative authority and responsibility for the Medicare

program to unelected, unaccountable officials within the very

same branch of government that is charged with implementing

the Medicare policies that affect so many Americans.

Therefore, we must strongly oppose the creation of IMAB,

IMAC, a reconstituted MedPac or any Medicare board or

commission that would undermine our ability to represent the

needs of the seniors and disabled in our own communities.

Again, we urge you to reject the inclusion of these or any

like proposal in health reform or any other legislation.

Sincerely,

Richard E. Neal; Mary Bono Mack; Patrick J. Tiberi; Phil

Gingrey; Marsha Blackburn; Joe Courtney; Stephen F.

Lynch; Michael C. Burgess; John Lewis; Jerry McNerney;

James P. McGovern; G. K. Butterfield; Bill Cassidy; Jim

McDermott; John W. Olver; Doris O. Matsui; Fortney Pete

Stark; Timothy H. Bishop; Allyson Y. Schwartz; Shelley

Berkley.

David P. Roe; Brett Guthrie; Mike Rogers; Henry C.

``Hank'' Johnson, Jr.; Linda T. Sanchez; Eric J. J.

Massa; Michael E. Capuano; Donna M. Christensen; Susan

A. Davis; Daniel Maffei; Michael M. Honda; Laura

Richardson; John Hall; Sam Farr; John Fleming; Yvette

D. Clarke; Kendrick B. Meek; Alan Grayson; Mike

Thompson; Edward J. Markey.

Eliot L. Engel; Gary L. Ackerman; John F. Tierney;

Edolphus Towns; Carolyn B. Maloney; Nita M. Lowey;

Donald M. Payne; Gregory W. Meeks; Lynn C. Woolsey; Ken

Calvert; Bob Filner; Pete Sessions; Steve Buyer;

Jerrold Nadler; Dana Rohrabacher; Brian P. Bilbray;

Gene Green; Barney Frank; Wm. Lacy Clay; Maurice D.

Hinchey.

William D. Delahunt; Bill Pascrell, Jr.; Steve Kagen;

Steve Israel; Joseph Crowley; Ginny Brown-Waite.

I thank the chairman for yielding.

I guess, if the Affordable Care Act is so popular with the American people, that's why 60 percent want it overturned. I'll start by saying that. That's the latest that I've seen.

Let me just go over briefly what the IPAB is and why I'm so vehemently opposed to it.

As an over-30-year practicing physician, I've looked at this, and I've seen two examples already of why I know and what I know is going to happen here.

We have the model in the SGR, the sustainable growth rate, which is what we pay Medicare physicians today. As has been stated multiple times, we have a board with 15 appointed people to it. Over half of them cannot be health care providers or cannot be health care-related folks that are going to make decisions based on a formula for Medicare spending. We're going to set limits. If you exceed those limits, then cuts will come to providers. We've done that with SGR. And guess what the Congress has had the ability to do during that time? To override those cuts, because everybody in here, both Republicans and Democrats, understand if we cut our providers, we're going to decrease access for those patients.

What has happened with SGR? Just 2 weeks ago, we passed an SGR temporary fix to the end of this year to avoid a 27 percent cut in physician payments. Guess what would happen with IPAB? Mr. Chairman, there would be a 27 percent cut to Medicare providers and in 5 years-- also, the hospitals are included. I can tell you our rural hospitals where I live will not survive those cuts. Those cuts will occur with minimal overlook from this U.S. Congress and no judicial review.

Let me read this right here: IPAB is the single biggest yielding of power to an independent entity since the creation of the Federal Reserve. This is not me. This is Peter Orszag, the former budget director for President Obama.

My concern as a practicing physician is that if we cut physician payments so far, our patients will not have access to us. Right now, Mr. Chairman, in the primary care group I'm in, that access is already being limited, and we see it around the country.

One final thing. I started practicing as an obstetrician in 1977. I've delivered almost 5,000 babies. I paid $4,000 a year for malpractice coverage. When I left, the young physician who replaced me was paying $74,000 a year. The patient has got no more value.

In 1975, when I got back home from the Army, every single malpractice carrier had left the State of Tennessee. Almost all 10,000 physicians in Tennessee get their insurance from a mutual company. Since 1975, over half the premium dollars that every doctor has paid into the State of Tennessee has gone to attorneys, not to the injured party. Less than 40 cents of every dollar has gone to the people who have actually been injured.

We have a terrible system of paying people who have been injured, compensating them. This will allow us to do that and will allow us to get some certainty so that those costs don't keep rising beyond anybody's ability to pay. What has happened in a lot of places, Mr. Chairman, is access to OB doctors and high-risk doctors has been limited because of the liability.

I strongly support H.R. 5, and urge my colleagues to do the same.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor one of Tennessee's heroic Marines, 22-year-old Lance Corporal Jonathan Lee Bedwell of Morristown.

Lance Corporal Bedwell was nearly killed in an IED explosion while on patrol in Afghanistan, protecting a position on a mission that he volunteered for. After losing his leg and sustaining multiple other injuries in the explosion, he is well on his way to a full and healthy recovery. It is because of the heroic actions such as this one that our brave service members make every day that we are able to enjoy the freedoms this great nation has to offer.

I salute Lance Corporal Bedwell as he not only exemplifies the best of America, but also the best of the United States Marine Corps. For this reason I ask you to join me in commemorating the valor of this extraordinary Marine. Also, I ask that a poem by Albert Caswell, written in honor of Lance Corporal Bedwell, be entered into the Record.

Because of These

Because of these . . .

Because of all of these this night . . .

Our nation's future looks very bright!

And as you lay your head down to sleep, all in your prayers

so to keep . . .

All in this golden peace, all because of their heroism that

which does so speak . . .

All in your hearts of love so very deep, but remember . . .

remember all of these . . .

Magnificent men, who all in such shades of green who carry on

that fight . . .

Southern Sons, who so defend . . . and live and die, all in

honor's light!

Men of honor, and such faith . . .

Whose most magnificent hearts shall never so wave!

And oh what a most brilliant sight they so cast!

The United States Marines,

One of the greatest things in our nation that which has come

to pass!

And your support is all they ask!

So sleep well this very night, while far across our shores

such fine men of might . . .

All for us carry on that fight!

Men like Jonathan, who so live and die . . .

And so give up their strong arms and legs, and yet do not ask

why!

Men who so rest in peace this very night,

All in such soft quiet cold graves this sad sight!

While, all across our nation their mother's cry!

For they have lost their greatest of all loves,

Their most blessed of all sons for us who have so died . . .

As some have lost their strong legs, arms and even eyes . . .

While awake in the middle of the night, as PTSD rules their

lives . . .

Sleep well this night . . .

Upon the Bed of Freedom that they so provide!

And as you lay yourself so down to sleep . . .

All because of our brave sons from Tennessee, ones like

Jonathan . . .

Who his fine promises did so keep!

Whose fine blood has so run red,

All for us so very deep!

This Volunteer, from this great state . . .

Jonathan whose courage so makes us weep!

As even the angel's too so cry . . .

All at selfless sacrifice,

All for God and Country as he did not so ask why!

As it was on that day, out on his patrol . . .

When his fine life almost went away . . .

When, an IED . . . went off putting him so close to the grave

. . .

With his leg lost and dying, as death just minutes away so

lying . . .

As when he so made a choice, listening to his most inner

voice . . .

As when Jonathan woke up on that next day . . .

Telling him go forth marine,

For you have mountains to so climb all out upon your way!

As when his new battle would begin,

As his fine heart would so command him to win!

Command him, to a recovery . . .

Step by step, day by day . . .

As this United States Marine how so makes his way . . .

As this Tennessee Titan,

So teaches us all in his actions upon each new day . . .

As he so beseeches, so deep down as he so reaches us . . .

All in what his fine heart so to convey!

As if I ever had a son, I wish he could have the heart half

as this one . . .

As I watch in awe, all in what I saw . . . as this marine

gets up and so runs!

For heaven so holds a place,

All for such men or honor and of such grace . . .

As Thy will be done . . .

Sleep well this night,

All in your hearts ever so hold these heroes and their

families so tight . . .

These fine women and men,

Who but country tis of thee do so defend!

United States Marines, like Jonathan who so gallantly fight

that fight!

That kind of man,

That Andrew Jackson would love and so understand,

And hold up to such great heights!

So as you lay your heads down to rest,

Remember all of these, our very best . . . and sleep well

this night!

All because of these . . .

Mr. Speaker, tomorrow we begin debate on a bill that would eliminate the Independent Payment Advisory Board, one of the most toxic components of President Obama's Affordable Care Act. This denial-of-care board is comprised of 15 unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats that will be empowered to cut Medicare in order to meet arbitrary spending targets.

Not only will this result in seniors being denied access to medical care they need, it will also put the government in the middle of the patient-doctor relationship.

Spending cuts proposed by the IPAB will automatically go into effect unless Congress finds alternative cuts of the same amount. And because implementation of the board's recommendations is exempted from judicial review, citizens can't even turn to the courts for help.

As a physician with over 30 years in practice, I can tell you that the President's proposal, which he has repeatedly defended, is wrongheaded and dangerous.

We must act to save Medicare from bankruptcy, which will come as soon as 2016, but IPAB is not and must not be the answer.