Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor and applaud M.L. Richardson for her outstanding service to our community.

M.L. Richardson has served the Jefferson County community in numerous ways since 1994. Currently, M.L. is serving as the Director of Strategy and Sustainable Development for two area corporations.

M.L. Richardson's dedication directly benefits her community with continued service to Jefferson County through countless volunteer hours spent for area organizations, serving on area Chambers of Commerce and boards including the Jefferson County School District's Bond-oversight committee, the Jefferson Economic Council, Community First Foundation, the Golden Civic Foundation and many others. Additionally, M.L. works to raise funds for area charities such as the Mother Cabrini Shrine.

In the words of one of her colleagues, ``M.L. is a woman who exhibits leadership through her everyday actions and has a professional and entrepreneurial spirit that has been proven over and over through countless accomplishments.''

I extend my deepest congratulations once again to M.L. Richardson for her recognition by the West Chamber of Jefferson County. I have no doubt she will exhibit the same dedication and character in all her future accomplishments.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor applaud Peggy Halderman for her outstanding service to our community.

The dedication demonstrated by Peggy Halderman directly benefits her community, and is exemplary of her high personal and professional standards. She started the Golden Backpack Program which currently feeds 242 children in 3 area schools by providing packs of food for the children to take home on weekends.

In addition to Peggy Halderman's dedicated efforts to feed hungry local children, as a professional chef she volunteers and supervises members of the Golden Rotary Club as they provide monthly luncheons at one of the two subsidized housing complexes located in Golden.

I extend my deepest congratulations once again to Peggy Halderman for her recognition by the West Chamber of Jefferson County. I have no doubt she will exhibit the same dedication and character in all her future accomplishments.

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 884 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for purposes of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Ms. Foxx), and I yield myself such time as I may consume.

General Leave

I ask unanimous consent that all Members be given 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on House Resolution 884.

Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 884 provides for consideration of H.R. 3639, the Expedited CARD Reform for Consumers Act of 2009, under a structured rule. The rule self-executes an amendment to clarify that the accelerated effective date of December 1, 2009, will apply only to those provisions of the Credit Card Act that deal directly with credit cards and currently have an effective date on or after February 22, 2010.

The amendment also provides that the accelerated effective dates are not applicable to any credit card issuer which is a depository institution with fewer than 2 million credit cards in circulation as of the date of the enactment of the bill.

This rule makes in order five amendments printed in the Rules Committee report. The amendments are each debatable for 10 minutes. The rule provides for one motion to recommit with or without instructions.

Mr. Speaker, earlier this year, Congress passed and the President signed into law the Credit Card Accountability Responsibility and Disclosure Act, the CARD Act for short. This legislation ordered important new rules to credit card issuers to end unfair, exploitive, and sharp practices, and to protect consumers against the tide of arbitrary rate hikes, spiking fees, and hidden charges.

The bill moved to end double-cycle billing, universal default and over-the-limit fees.

We passed this bill to give Americans a fair shake. The CARD Act marked a broad overhaul in the way credit card companies do business, and I acknowledge some of these changes require no small measure of time and resources to implement. Indeed, many lenders have made an honest effort to come into compliance with these new rules.

However, Mr. Speaker, the reason I stand here today is that some lenders have not used this interim period in such good faith. Since the CARD Act was signed into law, instead of preparing to implement these consumer protection provisions, some credit card companies have raised interest rates and have decreased credit limits on their consumers in advance of the effective dates. Responsible cardholders who have regularly met monthly obligations have seen their minimum payments and interest rates arbitrarily double and triple. They are finding their credit limits slashed, and they're hit with new and hidden fees. To many consumers, this is a slap in the face, and it is a violation of the spirit of the law designed to protect them. This has now unfairly increased the financial burdens on Americans in already difficult times.

Card issuers' actions highlight the need for protections under the CARD Act now more than ever. The credit card industry requires its cardholders to act responsibly, and it holds them accountable. It is in fairness that we require card issuers to act with the same level of responsibility and accountability.

H.R. 3639 would accelerate the implementation of certain provisions in existing law related to regulations and operations of the credit card companies. The CARD Act has set deadlines for implementing various reforms and procedures, with most of those measures scheduled to take effect in February and in August of 2010. This bill would move those effective dates forward to December 1, 2009.

American consumers don't need protection next year. They need it now, so I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of the rule and in favor of the underlying bill.

I reserve the balance of my time.

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

I would say to my friend from North Carolina, in walking around the district in the suburbs of Denver, which I represent, or in doing a government at the grocery every other Saturday, a number of topics are raised. It could be the Middle East. It could be energy, health care, immigration; but always among the top five are credit cards and overdraft fees because so many people are affected by what turns out to be some sharp practices by some issuers. The purpose of the CARD Act is to stop those sharp practices.

Most of the issuers are diligent, thorough, responsible companies; but some are not. What we've seen in the interim is that those who are not have just continued to increase their prices, to increase the interest rates, and to take advantage of this interim period. It's that type of sharp practice, that irresponsible behavior, that we're trying to stop by expediting the date to December 1, 2009.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I yield myself so much time as I might consume.

Mr. Speaker, I always appreciate hearing from my friend from Illinois. He has a number of things he wants to talk about. The trouble is that nothing he has talked about has anything to do with the bill that's before the House today. It's completely outside the topic.

I would just say to my friend from Illinois that this country, by taking a tack under President Bush and a Republican Congress, to cut taxes, prosecuting two wars, and driving this country into an economic ditch is what we, the Democrats, are trying to build ourselves out of. It will take time, and it will take a lot of effort on the part of everyone, but he should not be so quick to blame, because the roots of this financial distress go back to the Republican Congress and to President Bush.

Now, coming back to the topic at hand, this is about credit cards and about abusive practices which hurt individual Americans. It's not some amorphous kind of question that we face. It's for people who are barely making ends meet now, who have had good credit histories and who see their credit card interest rates rising three and four and five and six--and double sometimes--from what they were originally paying, through no fault of their own. This has got to stop.

So the purpose of the bill that is before the House today is to expedite the rules and regulations that were first passed by the House last May. It is to expedite them up to December 1, 2009.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I ask my friend if she has any other speakers?

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, how much time do I have and how much time does Ms. Foxx have?

I just was listening to my friend from North Carolina, and she really didn't talk about the bill. She talked about health care, which is a problem that has been lingering for a long time. Republicans for 12 years in the Congress, as well as 8 years under President Bush, failed to do anything about discriminating against people with prior illnesses. This health care bill takes care of that.

They failed to deal with anything related to the increase in premiums that individuals and businesses across the country are experiencing. We are going to take care of that.

Finally, they didn't do anything with the antitrust laws that protect insurance companies, and we are going to deal with that so that there is portability.

Now, let's get back to the bill at hand. The bill at hand deals with a real problem faced by Americans every day because companies are taking advantage of them by jacking up interest rates, continuing to use sharp practices, all to the detriment and to the harm of middle Americans. We have got to change that. So for purposes of this bill, this credit card bill, we are going to expedite the new rules to December 1. That is the purpose of the bill. That is the purpose of the underlying rule. That is why we are here today.

But with respect to the credit card bill, it is the usual Republican mantra, ``Just say no, we like the status quo,'' just as it applies to the health care bill. ``Just say no, we like the status quo.''

We can't afford the status quo when it comes to credit cards. We can't afford the status quo when it comes to health care.

With that, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

I think that my friend from North Carolina and I are going to have a lot of time on the Rules Committee to debate health care issues, so I am going to just remind her that the health care matter was never addressed by a Republican Congress and really not addressed by the President of the United States, except to create the doughnut hole for seniors. That is about the sum and substance of 12 years of Republicans in Congress and 8 years of President Bush in the White House.

Now, we've had three committees debate this health care bill over time, many, many amendments, lots of discussion, lots of conversations all across America dealing with the health care bill. So we're going to see that come up here very soon and we will continue to have this kind of spirited debate.

As it applies to the elections, I'm not sure if I want to remind my good friend from North Carolina that the Democrats picked up a seat in New York that they hadn't held for 154 years. So there was good news and bad news for both Democrats and Republicans in yesterday's elections.

But I would remind my friend we are here on the credit card bill. This is to move up the date for the rules and regulations to go into place to December 1 to stop the sharp practices that we see occurring today, which is the increase of interest rates, the continued use of double billing cycles, and the like, which are hurting everyday Americans. And that's got to stop.

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

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time to allow the gentlewoman from North Carolina to close and then I will close.

Mr. Speaker, just to correct a couple of points, TVs are always allowed in the Rules Committee, always are invited to each and every hearing and committee meeting. Sometimes they come, sometimes they don't. My guess is that they'll be there for the debate on the health care bill.

I just want to remind my friends on the other side of the aisle, in the bill that produced the doughnut hole for seniors on Medicare and was written by a Republican Congress with a Republican President, the word ``shall'' appeared in that bill 2,080 times.

I will yield to my good friend for about 10 seconds.

No. And the gentlewoman makes a point. No question about that.

But the problem here, Mr. Speaker, is that my friends on the Republican side of the aisle, they're concerned that there's too much regulation or we're focused on trying to rein in credit card companies or rein in insurance companies when it comes to health care. Their focus is on the profits of those companies. Well, our focus is on middle Americans who felt the sharp practices of credit card companies and have seen their premiums go sky high as part of the health system that we have in this country today.

Speaking about this bill, this credit card expedited bill, our purpose before the House of Representatives is to pass a rule that allows us to take up the credit card bill to move up rules and regulations to be imposed on credit card companies on December 1, 2009, instead of waiting until February of 2010 and August of 2010. The purpose is because we have seen rates being increased dramatically on all sorts of people. We see billing practice continue to be applied which hurts everyday Americans, and this has got to stop. It's not fair that the profits come before treating people honorably, responsibly, those people who have been paying their credit cards on time regularly. They're seeing their credit cards' interest rates increase. This has got to be limited and stopped.

So I would urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the previous question and on the rule.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Massachusetts, as well as Ms. Berkley and Mr. Wamp, for proposing this day of remembrance.

On November 11th, our Nation recognizes Veterans Day by honoring the sacrifices of the men and women of our armed services. But we need to acknowledge another group of patriots who sacrificed in the defense of this Nation.

This group of American citizens served for over 60 years to develop and ultimately construct the United States nuclear arsenal. The legacy of thousands of men and women who labored in the mines, nuclear fuel processing facilities and nuclear weapons assembly plants across the United States should be remembered forever, in particular for ending the cold war.

Thousands of these cold war scientists, managers, engineers and workers who secretly worked in both building and decommissioning the United States' nuclear arsenal are suffering adverse health effects of their work with and around toxic and radioactive materials.

Colorado's former Rocky Flats nuclear weapons facility, which is just a few miles from my house, and its thousands and thousands of workers, played an integral part to enhance the security of our Nation. These workers helped bring an end to the cold war. As we work to ensure that these workers receive the medical care and coverage they deserve, we need to offer them our thanks for their courageous service to our Nation. We continue to urge the administration to promptly respond to the various applications they have made for compensation and health care.

I rise in support today and ask that we pass House Resolution 790, to designate Friday, October 30th, the Cold War Patriots National Day of Remembrance for the services these men and women provided to our Nation.

Mr. Speaker, the mantra of our Republican colleagues here in the House is ``Just say `no.' We like the status quo.''

Well, that was their mantra when it came to the Recovery Act, which has now helped improve the stock market. Housing starts are up, and, in Colorado, unemployment is down from 7.8 percent in July to 7 percent today. The trend is right.

In Colorado, we have some 42 projects, transportation projects, as a result of the Recovery Act. We have increases in energy. We have wind companies coming. We have solar companies coming to Colorado. It has been a success, to their chagrin.

Now we hear ``Just say `no.' We like the status quo'' when it comes to health care. This country can't stand the status quo when it comes to health care. Premiums are up, deductibles are up, discrimination exists against people with prior illnesses. That's got to change.

We are going to vote ``yes'' and stop this inequity in health care.

And I thank my friend, Mr. Murphy, for kicking off tonight. And let's start where you were ending, about the status quo. Republicans in Congress just want to maintain the status quo. And I know in Colorado that's unacceptable, because what we've seen, like your chart, but even more so, the acceleration of the cost to keep people healthy and well is going through the roof. Whether it's a small business or a family, an individual, the premiums are going up. The deductibles are going up. I know at my old law firm, where it's in a position now where, after decades of providing coverage to everybody who works in the firm, there's a real question whether the firm can afford it anymore.

That's just not right--not in a country like our country. Not in America. We can do better than that. Change is what needs to take place. The status quo is no longer an option.

There's a fundamental flaw with the system that we have right now in that it allows discrimination against people who have prior health conditions. And that's just wrong. It's something that should not be allowed here in America.

I have a daughter with epilepsy. So, for me, it's a very personal kind of setting. She's a wonderful kid. She's no longer a kid. She's a young woman, college graduate, but still has seizures from time to time. She's not insurable unless she's in a big group insurance setting. She can't get insurance. She didn't ask to have epilepsy. But she's discriminated against because she has it.

That's just got to change. And I know in my district and in Colorado more than 80 percent of the people want to see change so that people with prior health conditions, preexisting conditions, get coverage and are not discriminated against.

We have a fundamental flaw in our health system today that has to be corrected. It's wrong. And it's probably unconstitutional under the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment to our Constitution. We've got to change that.

So we need to rein in costs for small businesses and for individuals. We need

to eliminate discrimination against people based on preexisting conditions. But there's a third component to this that I really think does offer hope and promise when we bring about this change and that is the research that we have going on in prevention, health and wellness.

There are some things coming down the pike if we continue to do research that will really advance medicine when it comes to cancer and heart disease which will help individuals and their quality of life and it will help this country rein in the costs that we see just growing every single day. This is a challenge that we must take, that we must tackle. We cannot shrink from it. America doesn't shrink from tough problems. We tackle them.

Our friends on the other side, the Republicans in Congress, they like to avoid this. They're not willing to take on tough issues. We are. We are going to take this on. We are going to change the health care system for the better of America and Americans. And we're going to do it this year.

With that, I yield to my good friend from New Hampshire (Mr. Hodes).

I thank my friend from Connecticut. Let's talk about why this works, why this concept works. You have millions of people out there, small businesses and individuals, who can't get insurance today. It's just too costly. They don't create a big enough pool. The actuaries say this doesn't work. You put them in one big pool like the Federal Government, like State governments, like Boeing, like some big company that can go to insurance companies, go to other types of mechanisms and really drive down the cost per employee or the like.

So we create a marketplace. We call it an exchange in this bill, but there is a marketplace for small businesses and individuals to go to. They're going to be able to select from private insurance companies, Blue Cross/Blue Shield, Aetna, CIGNA, United Health and the like; but there will also be another choice, another option which is being called the public option, but it gives another choice for consumers, another choice for small business, another choice for individuals.

Because there are now millions of people in the pool, it's going to be something that many companies would like to have. They would like to be able to attract those kinds of customers, get new paying individuals into their pool. We think that that's going to drive down prices, or at least contain the costs that all of us have seen go up and up and up. So I think that there is a real opportunity for us, both in terms of cost to the public as well as cost to private business, to really rein in these costs and make sure all Americans are covered by insurance in case something bad happens, but also make it so it's affordable for each and every one of us.

With that, I will yield to my friend from New Hampshire because he looks like he has something he wants to add.

I appreciate my friend from Vermont.

I think within the system, the insurance companies have done what they are supposed to do. They're supposed to maximize profits for their shareholders. So I don't blame them. I think that we need to change the system, and that's what we're doing. And I guess I have confidence in them to really deliver health care insurance and coverage to people at a much more affordable level. I think they're going to be able to compete just fine. The system right now doesn't really mandate that or require that of anybody.

So we have got to take a look at a whole variety of these insurance reforms so that everyday Americans aren't placed into having to go to the emergency room as their first place of care. I mean, if you want to talk about the most expensive way to deliver health care to Americans across our Nation, it's if they have to go to the emergency room instead of to their doctor or instead of to the local clinic. To go to the emergency room drives up prices like crazy. That's got to stop, and that's what we're going to change. That's the reason we are willing to tackle a very tough subject.

The last time America and Congress really addressed the health care system in this country was 44 years ago in 1965 with the Older Americans Act. This is not easy to deal with this. A lot of people have different opinions. The health care system touches each and every one of us. But we are not going to shrink from this. We have to tackle it, and we are. We're going to tackle it in a way that it improves the system and improves the lives of everybody across the country.

And my friend from Connecticut, I would like to say that we have most of New England represented here with Vermont and New Hampshire and Connecticut, and the New England Patriots are playing the Broncos on Sunday, and I'd wager, although that's probably something I shouldn't do on the floor of the House, but my guess is my Broncos are going to defeat your New England Patriots.

I thank you, Mr. Hodes.

And just for me, I would like to wrap up this way: that this is a system where there are parts that are broken, there are parts that are working, and there are parts that haven't been addressed in a long time. We're going to fix what's broken, we're going to keep--and to the degree we can--improve what's been working, and we're going to work on ways to make Americans or help Americans be healthier and to have research that directs them towards better cures and prevention of very difficult illnesses, whether it's heart disease or cancer.

This is a tough subject that we have tackled, but we're not going to shy away from it. We can't. Change is what has been demanded of us. The system requires change. The status quo is not an option. We will tackle this, and we will make this better, and we're going to do it right now. There is no more time to waste--as much as our friends on the Republican side of the aisle would like to just avoid this at all costs. The trouble is it's costing America too much, and we will take it on.

With that, to my friend in Connecticut to wrap it up.

Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 723, I was unavoidably detained and missed the vote on House Resolution 760. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''

Will the gentleman yield?

Thank you, Mr. Miller.

Mr. Chairman, Mr. Souder and I have had a conversation. I think we're going to reach a good compromise that will be good for the bill. I have committed, as have you, to work with Mr. Souder in a conference committee to get that done.

Mr. Speaker, I just heard my friend from Pennsylvania (Mr. Tim Murphy) talk about the business that really does involve the House, involve the Nation, and really the world, and it's time to get down to business, stop the name-calling, and proceed with the difficult chores we have at hand.

I couldn't agree with him more, and I thank him for his 1-minute.

I thank my friend, Mr. Yarmuth.

And I want to follow up on that. The last few months, in Colorado as well as every place else in the Nation and other places in the world, we've been talking about how do we finance health care? How do we finance it in Colorado, in Kentucky, wherever it might be? But that subject really leads to so many other conversations because the health care system touches every life in America, 300 million plus people.

And I can tell you from the Perlmutter family, from my family, the passion really has been evident because there are some things in the system that are broken and we have to fix them. There are some things in the

system that are working, but they can be better. And we need to do this in a way that's affordable to all Americans.

Let's start with what's broken, because that's something that affects my family and I know thousands and thousands and thousands of families across the country, and that is the discrimination that is suffered by people with prior illnesses. One of my kids has epilepsy. And if she doesn't have a job where there is group health insurance she is going to be denied coverage or be placed in a situation where the cost of her health care is going to be way beyond her means. Thank goodness she has a job where there is group health insurance, but if she were ever to leave that job or lose that job, she would be in trouble.

And she's like so many other people around the country who face this discrimination--and from my point of view, that discrimination is just wrong, and it's probably unconstitutional under the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, which guarantees all of us equal protection of the laws of this great country.

So there's a place where we really have a problem in the health care system where people who have prior illnesses, prior conditions, can't get coverage or they can only get coverage at prices that are out of sight.

Now, I don't fault the insurance companies on that; they're insurance companies, and they want to insure individuals and people who aren't sick. I don't blame them, that's how insurance works. If you insure somebody who is sick and you know it's going to cost you, then that doesn't help the shareholders and that doesn't help the company as a whole. But that is what's wrong with this, and that's why we've got to change it.

I compliment the President and the Members of this House who have had the guts to step up and deal with this issue because it is a major issue and a major change to policy that we have here in the United States, which is to cover people with prior illnesses. That's number one. And I can tell you, in my district in Colorado, almost everybody thinks that that needs to be changed. So we're dealing with something that is fundamentally wrong within the system, and it's something that almost every family can understand and relate to because they either have somebody within the family or they have a close neighbor or friend who has some kind of illness, number one.

Number two, we've got to fix something that every small business and individuals are seeing, and that is the increase in premiums year after year, and deductibles increasing so that the cost of your health insurance just keeps going up without any end in sight. And so we're trying, as part of this legislation, to put some restraints on this so that we slow these increases down so that businesses and individuals can afford insurance.

This is part of the menu, the choices that we want to bring as part of the legislation so that there is competition and choice and availability to small businesses and to individuals so that they can acquire insurance so that, God forbid, something bad happens medically or within the health of their family or their employees, that there's coverage.

So we're trying to deal with two very fundamental problems with our health care system today: One, denying people or discriminating against people with prior illnesses; and two, trying to put some lid or restraint on the ever-increasing premiums that we see to small businesses and to individuals so that they have a place they can turn to get insurance that isn't going to break them in half.

Now, we can improve things that are working. And one of those places where we really do have some great success stories and we can build on those is in the research that the country and our medical universities are conducting throughout the Nation. We are on the cusp of some tremendous breakthroughs when it comes to heart disease and cancer, two of the things that are so expensive to both individuals and businesses and the Nation. So if we can continue to really develop this research and continue to provide resources for research, there is hope and promise on some very difficult diseases that ultimately we can overcome.

And so it's with these kinds of things in mind--righting a wrong that comes about with discriminating against people with prior illnesses, helping small businesses and individuals find affordable insurance where there is competition and choice, and three, advancing the research that is ongoing in the Nation today where we really are going to have some tremendous breakthroughs that will be good for people's quality of life, but also for their personal pocketbooks and for the national pocketbook. There is real opportunity here.

We have to change this health care system. We can't continue to say, ``No, we can't.'' We have to say, ``Yes, we can.'' And that's what I want to see as we move forward with this health care debate.

With that, I would yield back to my friend from Kentucky.

Will the gentleman yield?

One of the stories that I came across when I was home a couple of weeks ago--and this occurred at my neighborhood filling station where I'm pumping gas because I've got to go to a couple of events on a Saturday morning. One neighbor came up, and he was on the other side of the pump right across from me.

He says, This health care thing, Ed, you know, I really want you to go slow and make sure that this thing is financially sound.

As he was saying that, the neighbor who was pumping gas at the island just behind me came over and said, Ed, you guys aren't doing enough, and you're not going fast enough.

So the two of them, as I started pumping gas, started having this conversation. It was a great conversation. Both of them have very, very legitimate points; and we need, as we go through this, to make sure this is financially sound and that we try to predict as much as we can on an ongoing basis. We do know that there are problems with the system. We do know that we pay, as a nation, a lot more than almost any other industrialized country around; and, competitively, that puts us at a disadvantage. So we know we have to do something.

The gentleman who said we're not going fast enough was, you know, a young father--I think probably 35 years old. He works for a roofing company. He'd like to start his own roofing company, but he can't because his wife has Crohn's disease; and because she has Crohn's disease, if he were to go out and set off on his own, be a real entrepreneur and really try to make a go of it, which is what we all want to do in this country--and it's the opportunity that this country provides so many people--he can't because of his wife's medical condition, and the probability is that he won't be able to get anything to cover her if he sets out on his own.

So these two gentlemen, both of whom are neighbors of mine, had this great conversation--both of them with legitimate points--but there is an urgency here, and there is a restriction on people really going out and doing things the American way by setting out on their own to see what they can do for themselves, for their families and, ultimately, for their communities and this Nation.

So I clearly had an event, or a conversation, where the system today prevents entrepreneurship of young men and women who really want to, you know, try some new opportunities for themselves and for their families.

So, with that, I would yield back to my friend.

My friend, Mr. Yarmuth, mentioned Medicare, and one thing where there has been another myth is that there were going to be cuts in Medicare or things like that. In fact, it's just the opposite.

There are additional benefits, and one of the benefits that is very important, I know, to my district, and certainly when I was out talking to people, was getting rid of the doughnut hole in prescription drug costs. So that if you get to a certain level, all of a sudden, instead of the Medicare benefit paying for it, now you have got to pay for it out of your pocket.

And many people run into this, and it is financially just difficult and, in some cases, devastating to them because of this doughnut hole. And this bill, part of it is to eliminate this doughnut hole so that the benefits cover prescription medicines.

I think the bottom line for me here is that the status quo is not an option, that there has to be real change to the way this system operates, for individuals who are discriminated against because of their physical health and conditions to small businesses who see the costs going through the roof, and to the Nation that sees its costs going through the roof.

We can't stand idly by. We can't allow failure to reign. We must act. And it's a difficult subject. It's a very complicated system, and it touches 300 million people across this country, so everybody has a perspective on it.

But looking at it in the whole and trying to deal with it as a whole, we must make changes. And that's what I hope will occur over the next few months here in this House of Representatives and in the Senate and ultimately signed by the President so that we can get on with this and start making the changes that are so desperately needed before the system continues to get worse, premiums continue to go higher, people who shouldn't be discriminated against are.

We need change, and I am ready for it now.

I thank my friend, I thank him for hosting this hour. I think for me the status quo is not an option. We have to act because there are things in this system, the health care system and the way we finance it. We need insurance reform, because there are things that are broken. We need to fix what's broken. We need to improve what's working, and we need to have a system that is affordable and accessible to all Americans. And now is the time to act. We can't fade into the woodwork and hope this all makes itself better. Sometimes you have to tackle tough subjects, and people aren't going to be always right in line with you.

Now is the time for us to tackle a very tough subject, to bring the change that's needed for generations to come, to save money and provide care for individuals, for businesses and this Nation.

Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

The motion was agreed to; accordingly (at 7 o'clock and 26 minutes p.m.), the House adjourned until tomorrow, Wednesday, September 16, 2009, at 10 a.m.

Mr. Speaker, we have a health care system that is ailing and is almost on life support. It needs a major operation, and it needs it in three ways.

First, we have to stop discriminating against people with prior illnesses. It's wrong and probably unconstitutional under the 14th Amendment.

Second, small businesses and individuals can't get health care insurance because they are too small or they're by themselves and have no pool. We need to make insurance and health care financing available to small businesses and to individuals.

Third, we are on the cusp of some tremendous breakthroughs in medicine and in health care which will help us with heart disease, diabetes and cancer, but in general, wellness across the board, which will save this country a lot of money.

We have the most expensive health care system in the world. We deserve

the best health care system and financing, and that is the operation we are undertaking here in the Congress.

Madam Speaker, I am submitting this statement to express congratulations and gratitude to Clarence ``Cal'' W. Marsella on the occasion of his retirement as General Manager of the Regional Transportation District (RTD).

Under Mr. Marsella's leadership, RTD built partnerships with local, state and federal officials to realize a vision of an innovative public transit system that meets the unique needs of our region.

During his tenure with RTD, Mr. Marsella oversaw the successful completion of three new light rail lines, including the T-REX light rail project that opened November 17, 2006. In 2004 metro area voters overwhelmingly approved the FasTracks transit expansion program for the eight-county metro area. This represents the largest transit-only voter approved program in the United States. With Mr. Marsella's determination, progress on the FasTracks program has moved ahead swiftly, and construction is currently underway on the West Corridor which runs from downtown Denver to Golden, Colorado.

Mr. Marsella began his transportation career in the highway engineering division of the State of Connecticut Department of Transportation in 1974. He now serves on the National Academy of Sciences Transportation Research Board and regularly lectures at the University of Denver and the University of Colorado masters degree programs in Transportation and Public Administration. He also speaks to numerous groups on the benefits and nuances of public-private partnerships. He was selected by the American Public Transportation Association as the Outstanding Public Transportation Manager in 2006 and, under his leadership, RID was selected as the Outstanding Transportation Agency in North America in 2003 and 2008.

I congratulate and extend my sincere gratitude to Cal Marsella for his service to the Denver region. I wish him continued success and all good fortune in his work ahead.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the comments of my friend from New Jersey, but I would say the word that comes to mind is ``amnesia.'' My friends on the Republican side of the aisle have amnesia. They have amnesia over how the Bush administration tried to deregulate everything, tried to make government smaller and more ineffective so that we could have Ponzi schemes as existed under Madoff. That occurred under the George Bush administration. We had the failure with Katrina, and we had the biggest collapse in the banking sector ever because of deregulation and a belief that the free market could do anything it wanted to do.

Now, this bill is very mild. What it allows, Mr. Speaker, is it allows shareholders to have a say on what the officers of the company make in terms of salary, the owners having a say on pay. What could be more American and more free enterprise than that?

What it does allow is the board of directors to overrule the shareholders if they think that's appropriate. But we need to have the ownership of the company have a say on what their executives make so that it doesn't get out of line and that there is no back-scratching going on.

The second piece that my friends complain about and that the substitute is designed to gut is that the Federal banking regulators have a say on the commissions and the bonuses and the

stock options that exist. And where we saw this most specifically was in mortgages. Lots of mortgages sold, lots of commissions made, lots of stock options went straight through the roof, but there was a time bomb in those mortgages 4 or 5 years down the road that caused all those mortgages to fail and companies and banks to collapse.

We're not going to allow that anymore. We're not going to allow the taxpayer to be holding the bag the way we've had to hold the bag this last fall. It is a time for reasonable regulation to restore confidence in our financial system. That's what this bill does. The substitute amendment guts that.

I urge a ``no'' vote on the substitute and a ``yes'' vote on say-on- pay.

Parliamentary Inquiry

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Speaker be authorized on this legislative day to entertain a motion to suspend the rules relating to H.R. 3435.