I thank my friend from Vermont. I want to piggyback on something that you just said. I hope that we can and we will work with the Republican majority on a lot of issues to get people back to work in America, to stop outsourcing jobs to…
I thank my friend from Vermont.
I want to piggyback on something that you just said. I hope that we can and we will work with the Republican majority on a lot of issues to get people back to work in America, to stop outsourcing jobs to other countries, to stop importing oil at tremendous price to this country so that money continues to flow away from the U.S. instead of into the U.S. I want to work with them on those kinds of things.
But what I am concerned about is something you just mentioned. The ideology and the radical approach that they are taking to repeal something that was put into place over the last 2 years but has been needed by this country for decades is something that I will fight. Ideological, radical extreme positions are not what the American people want. They want practical, solid solutions where people are treated fairly and equally.
In the health legislation, the Affordable Health Care Act that we passed, the guts of that legislation is about treating people equally. What I mean by that is we stop discriminating against people with preexisting conditions. They are now free from that kind of discrimination. That is so important.
We talked a lot today about the Constitution. Well, prior to the Constitution we had the Declaration of Independence, and the Declaration of Independence starts off, ``We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.'' It probably should have added ``women'' at that point, but back then it was ``all men are created equal.''
That is carried forward in the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, and I have prepared a chart of this, of the language, which says no State shall deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
People with prior illnesses, with physical conditions, have been discriminated against because of those conditions and illnesses. That is wrong, it is immoral, and in my opinion it is unconstitutional.
In my district, I was standing at a gas station. A guy comes up to me and he says, You all have to pass that legislation. My daughter has Crohn's disease. I am in a roofing company. I want to start my own roofing company, but because she has this disease, I have to stay here. Otherwise, she will be uninsurable because of her prior condition, and I am stuck in that job.
Well, this bill, the heart of this bill is to give freedom from that kind of discrimination against her prior illness, freedom to that roofer so he can go start his business. That is at the heart of the American way.
In my own situation, I have a daughter with epilepsy. She didn't ask to have epilepsy; that is just part of her makeup. But because of the epilepsy, she is uninsurable, unless she is part of some big group policy.
So in the Affordable Health Care Act, we have done away with that kind of discrimination. We have freed people from that kind of discrimination. The Republican majority, ideologically, radically driven, wants to take that freedom away, and I will fight that today, tomorrow, and next week.
With that, I yield back to my friend from Vermont.
Well, I'd say to my friend from North Carolina that he was talking about the fact that seniors will see this doughnut hole, their prescription drug prices go back up, the costs go back up; but even, I think, more worrisome than that is the fact that, under the Affordable Care Act, those same seniors receive $250.
In my district in Colorado, the suburbs of Denver, 31,000 seniors received this past fall $250 in assistance to payments of their prescription drugs. Even with that, we still save the $230 billion that you were talking about. Yet, when the Republicans repeal this in kind of an ``all or nothing'' situation, do those seniors have to pay that $250 back, each of them? I don't know. I think they ought to be worried about that, and that's why this is such an extreme measure.
They are taking away freedoms that belong to the people, that belong to Americans. They are doing it in a radical and ideological way. When they said during the campaign, you know, Let's put people back to work, and let's not spend too much money, they're spending more. They're taking away freedoms, and I am concerned that those seniors are going to have to pay that $250 back, per senior. The seniors should be concerned as well.
This is a radical act, Mr. Speaker and Mr. Price. We have got to fight it. I hate fighting these battles right out of the box, but if they're going to take these kinds of radical positions, we have no choice.
With that, I would yield to my friend from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).
Sure. I appreciate my friends.
You know, instead of amending or repairing, as Mr. Price from North Carolina described it, they want to repeal, just take it away.
Well, they're taking away freedoms. They're taking away the freedom from discrimination for prior illnesses, like my daughter with epilepsy, like the daughter who had Crohn's disease, or the friend at the gas station. It's taking away the freedom from cancellation because you get sick, you know, and lose your insurance. You know, it's taking away the freedom to move jobs so you're not stuck in a job, so you can move jobs and not fear losing your insurance. I mean, they're taking away a lot--and maybe this $250 that went to the seniors. It is a radical move to take these freedoms away, and I hope they think twice and don't vote to repeal.
With that, I would yield back to my friend from Vermont for his final remarks.