Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, the debate we're having today has nothing to do with repealing the 1099 provision. Like every Democrat here who was in Congress last year, I've already voted to do that.

We brought forth a bill last year to repeal the 1099 provision and paid for it by closing tax loopholes that encourage businesses to move jobs overseas and other loopholes that promote tax avoidance. Even though that bill was endorsed by NFIB, all but two of our Republican colleagues voted no because they preferred to protect big business over small businesses.

Because of Republican opposition last year, we're here again considering legislation to repeal the 1099 provision. Unfortunately, our Republican colleagues have taken an area of agreement and rejected bipartisanship by choosing to tax middle class families. That's right, this Republican bill is a $25 billion middle class tax increase.

The Affordable Care Act provides tax credits to make health coverage affordable to those with lower and middle incomes. These tax credits are provided in advance and then are

reconciled at the end of the year. In this bill today, Republicans are trying to raise $25 billion by putting middle class families on the hook for massive tax increases when they reconcile those payments. The Joint Committee on Taxation estimates that this Republican bill will raise taxes on middle class families in this income category by an average of $3,000. Many families would be liable for much higher tax increases.

The President has announced his strong opposition to this financing mechanism. Consumer Advocates have also spoken out in opposition. These groups include Families USA, Community Catalyst, SEIU and the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

All of us want to resolve this 1099 problem. But to do so on the backs of middle income working Americans is flat out wrong. I urge my colleagues to join me in voting no on this bill today so that we can come together and find a way to finance 1099 repeal that doesn't gouge the middle class.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce the Investing in Our Future Act. This bill will discourage speculation in the financial markets, help us shrink the deficit, and help create a better world for future generations.

Today is the Global Day of Action when hundreds of organizations are calling on the world's governments to create financial transactions taxes to generate billions of dollars to

help battle the problems that threaten the planet.

Our deficit is now a record $1.5 trillion. Most suggestions about how to reduce the deficit require cutting government programs and discretionary spending. These kinds of cuts hurt American families and don't stimulate our economy. I propose that we instead shrink our deficit by looking to the currency market.

Every day $4 trillion in currency is traded by the world's largest financial institutions in the foreign exchange markets. U.S. banks generated $7 billion in foreign exchange trading revenue in the first three quarters of 2010. Much of this trading is purely speculative. The banks attempt to outguess the market and in turn, destabilize the economy.

The Investing in Our Future Act will place a microtax of just 0.005 percent on the currency trades conducted on or on behalf of U.S. financial institutions. This small tax would not be enough to disrupt the larger currency market but it could decrease speculative trades by as much as 14 percent.

The billions generated by this tax will be divided between deficit reduction and causes that will help us build a better world. Forty percent of revenues would be reserved for deficit reduction.

Ten percent of revenues will go into a Child Care Assistance Trust Fund. These funds will be used for subsidized child care here in the United States, where six out of seven children who qualify for subsidized care do not receive it.

Fifty percent of revenues will be evenly divided between the fight against climate change and world poverty. The Global Change Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation Trust Fund will receive 25 percent of all revenues. Climate change destabilizes our world because it contributes to extreme weather, food shortages, and poverty. The other 25 percent will go into a Multilateral Global Health Trust Fund. This trust fund will support programs in poor countries that lack adequate medical infrastructure to treat and prevent diseases like malaria, HIV/ AIDs and tuberculosis.

By contributing the revenues from this bill toward these causes, we will be investing in a stable and healthy future for our own country and others across the globe. I urge my colleagues to support the Investing in Our Future Act.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to lament the expiration of the improved Trade Globalization Adjustment Assistance Act enacted in 2009. By refusing to extend this, the

Republicans have severely undermined the effectiveness of this vital program that helps people who have lost their jobs due to trade.

TAA has had bipartisan support for fifty years. There are workers in all 50 states who received assistance under this legislation. TAA ensures that we support American workers when their jobs are shipped overseas. It provides these workers training for new jobs, health coverage and assistance with their job search.

The 2009 reforms brought TAA into a new era so that service sector workers could also benefit from the program. This improved program allowed workers who lost their jobs to China or India, and not just countries with which we have a Free Trade Agreement, to benefit from the program. It also expanded the health coverage tax credit to 80% from 65% of premium costs and granted an extra 26 weeks of income support for workers in training.

In just the last eighteen months, over 400,000 workers qualified for benefits under the TAA program, and nearly 27,000 of them are in California. Nearly half of those workers qualified under the provisions adopted in 2009. These new, expanded benefits have now expired because of Republican inaction.

The Republican majority is focused on cutting $100 billion from the budget, voting on Patriot Act wiretaps, and taking away health care from millions of Americans. What they aren't doing is helping workers. By allowing the 2009 TAA reforms to expire, the Republicans have once again demonstrated that their priorities are out of line with the needs of ordinary Americans.

We owe it to these hundreds of thousands of workers to support them when their job moves overseas. I urge the Republican leaders of Congress to bring an extension of Trade and Globalization Adjustment Assistance Act of 2009 to the floor as quickly as possible.

Offered By: Mr. Stark

Amendment No. 141: At the end of the bill (before the short

title), insert the following:

Mr. Speaker, I rise with my colleague Ways and Means Health Subcommittee Chairman Wally Herger (R-CA) to re-introduce the Strengthening Medicare Anti-Fraud Measures Act.

This bipartisan legislation is a direct byproduct of a joint hearing held by the Ways and Means Health and Oversight Subcommittees

last year. The hearing was on efforts to reduce fraud, waste and abuse in Medicare.

We heard testimony at that hearing from two panels of witnesses. The first panel consisted of Members of Congress pursuing legislative initiatives to reduce Medicare fraud, waste and abuse. The second panel was made up of government witnesses: Office of the Inspector General of the Department of Health and Human Services (OIG), The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, and the Government Accountability Office.

Numerous witnesses raised concerns about limitations to the authority of the Office of the Inspector General to minimize Medicare fraud. From this discussion it became clear to Representative Herger and me that we should change the law in order provide the Inspector General with the additional requested tools to better protect Medicare.

This is a simple bill with only two provisions. It expands the OIG's permissive authority to ban executives whose companies have been convicted of Medicare fraud from the program. Second, it expands the OIG's permissive authority to exclude affiliates of corporations convicted of fraud, including parent companies hiding behind convicted corporate shells.

The first change is important because it will enable the OIG to protect Medicare from executives who circumvent exclusion by moving to another company. Under current law, executives whose companies are convicted of fraud can be excluded from Medicare. However, if the executive has left the company by the time of conviction, he or she cannot be barred from Federal health care programs. These executives are able to move from one company to another and continue to defraud Medicare, seniors, and taxpayers.

The second change provides the OIG with stronger tools to address corporations that have engaged in fraud. Companies that engage in fraud often set up shell companies to insulate themselves from liability. Criminal settlement negotiations can result in the conviction of these shell organizations with no real operational impact on the parent company. Without discretionary authority to exclude parent companies from the program, the OIG is missing a tool in its arsenal that could allow the government to exclude particularly bad actors or obtain stronger prospective remedies in settlements.

This legislation passed the House of Representatives last year by voice vote. Unfortunately, it was not taken up in the Senate. We urge our colleagues to cosponsor this bill so we can quickly enact these new anti-fraud tools to protect Medicare beneficiaries and all of America's taxpayers.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce a resolution in support of designating February 12th as ``Darwin Day.'' Charles Darwin was born on February 12, 1809, and his life has had a profound impact on the course of human history. Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection has not only provided a compelling explanation for the diversity of life, it is also the foundation of modern biology and genetics. Darwin exemplified the scientific curiosity that has led to new scientific breakthroughs that have helped humanity solve numerous problems and improve our quality of life.

Charles Darwin is worthy of recognition and honor. His birthday should be a time for us to celebrate the advancement of human knowledge and the achievements of reason and science. It should also be a time for Congress and other elected officials to ensure that children are being taught scientific facts and not religious dogma in our public schools. It is also an opportunity to push back against those that seek to undermine the science of climate change for political ends.

I urge all of my colleagues celebrate Darwin Day on February 12th and recognize the important role of science in our society.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to once again oppose the reauthorization of expiring provisions in the Patriot Act.

Last month, Republican leaders gave Members of Congress the chance to read the Constitution on the floor of the House. Perhaps we skipped over the Bill of Rights, because the provisions we're extending today are a direct infringement on Americans' constitutional rights.

This legislation grants the federal government sweeping authority to pry into the private lives of Americans. Federal authorities have the power to access private records like library records or credit card statements, even if it's not related to a terrorism investigation. Authorities can receive wiretapping permits without specifying who or what they're going to wiretap. Secret intelligence courts can authorize law enforcement to spy on foreigners who are not connected to terrorist groups.

Many of my colleagues were elected based on their rhetoric opposing more power to the federal government. Today's vote gives them a chance to put their money where their mouths are, and say no to giving government the power to violate Americans' civil liberties. I urge my colleagues to oppose this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce the Defense and Deficit Reduction Act, legislation that will reduce defense spending and thereby decrease the deficit over the next 5 years. This legislation serves as an addendum to the Majority's H. Res. 38, a resolution that reduces all non-defense discretionary spending to 2008 levels. If all other discretionary spending is slated for cuts under the Republican plan, then defense should not be exempt.

My bill will reduce government spending by over $36 billion this year and about $182 billion over the next 5 years. The legislation then requires that these funds be dedicated to reducing the deficit. As defense constitutes almost 60 percent of all discretionary spending, it only makes sense that it be included when other discretionary spending is being cut. These figures cannot and should not be ignored.

Even Department of Defense Secretary Gates has acknowledged the need for defense spending reductions saying, ``We must come to realize that not every defense program is necessary, not every defense dollar is sacred or well-spent, and more of everything is simply not sustainable.''

Going back to 2008 levels of defense spending would be approximately a 5 percent reduction. With the President reducing the number of troops in Afghanistan starting this year, we should be able to lessen our current spending on war costs. We also have the support of the American people. According to a recent CBS News Poll, over 50 percent of Americans believe we should reduce defense spending to decrease the Federal deficit. Making reductions to the defense budget can help solve our Nation's long-term fiscal problems.

If the new Majority in Congress really wants to lower the deficit as they claim to, then they must take all spending into consideration.

I urge my colleagues to join me in working to rein in wasteful spending and support the Defense and Deficit Reduction Act.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

I rise today to oppose the budgetless resolution. It ignores job creation, has no numbers, no specifics, and it gives no serious plan to reduce the deficit.

The Republicans say they want to decrease the deficit and that they will try to cut non-defense discretionary spending back to 2008 levels. They say this will save $100 billion in discretionary spending.

I am giving them a chance to put their money where their mouths are. Today, I introduced H.R. 413, legislation that would reduce defense spending to 2008 levels. We can't be serious about getting our house in order if we are exempting 60 percent of discretionary spending from cuts. My legislation will save $182 billion over the next 5 years. That's $182 billion from a sector riddled with extra planes and engines the Pentagon doesn't even want. We spend more than any other country. The next closest is China; we spend seven times what they do. How about just cutting back to maybe only spending five or six times as much as China does.

I urge support of H.R. 413.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to repealing health reform. Instead of focusing on job creation, my friends across the aisle want to refight the health reform debate and take away patient protections that are already helping people get the health care they need.

It bears repeating: health reform is already helping millions of people in America. These aren't just numbers; they are real people. In my community, I received a letter from a young woman named Stephanie Blazin from Castro Valley, California. Stephanie recently graduated from college, married and moved to California where her husband was pursuing a graduate degree. She was lucky and quickly got a job. Then within her first few weeks of the job, she found she was pregnant. This should have been an exciting time for a young couple to start a family. Instead, she learned that her pregnancy was a preexisting condition and she had obtained no coverage for any medical needs surrounding it. She said to me, The first thought through our minds were tainted by how we were going to financially handle this pregnancy and a baby.

Fortunately, because health reform is law and she is under age 26, Stephanie was able to quickly change her health insurance to obtain coverage on her father's health insurance. She now has full coverage for her pregnancy.

Under the Republicans' plan, Stephanie would be stuck with NoCare. That's the Republican plan. By repealing health reform, the GOP plan would provide no protections for people's health, NoCare if you lose your job, NoCare if you have a preexisting condition, NoCare if you are a senior in the doughnut hole, NoCare if your insurer hikes your premiums and you can't afford it.

The Affordable Care Act has finally enacted fair rules for insurance companies. The Republicans want to take those protections away and put the insurance industry back in charge.

I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the Republican NoCare bill.

Madam Speaker, I join my colleagues in honoring Representative Giffords, mourning the victims of this senseless shooting, and lauding the heroism of those who endangered themselves to help those who were injured.

Saturday's horrific shooting in Tucson of Representative Gabrielle Giffords, members of her staff, a federal judge, and innocent bystanders should never have happened. Representative Giffords was performing the most fundamental duty of a Member of Congress--she was making herself available to her constituents. It is something we all do--and something I strongly believe we must continue to do.

My thoughts are with the victims, their family members and their friends at this time.

I hope that we can learn from this tragedy.

Violence has no place in our democracy. While the details of the shooting are still coming to light, we can all agree that political rhetoric and imagery that condones or encourages violence--whether from activists, party organizations, or politicians--is unacceptable. We can have differences of opinion on policy and still treat each other with humanity.

Madam Speaker, I rise to share a letter written to the Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius last week. In this letter, copied below, the CEO for the California Public Employees Retirement System, CalPERS, details several key ways the health reform law is already helping their members.

CalPERS is the largest non-federal purchaser of health benefits in the country outside of the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, FEHBP. They highlight expanded coverage for young adults, removal of lifetime limits on benefits, and assistance with the costs of retiree health benefits as three key ways reform is already making a difference.

Republicans refuse to look at the benefits of health reform and are continuing to insist they will ``repeal ObamaCare.''

President Obama should be proud to have the right wing label health reform with his name. As this CalPERS example shows, health reform is expanding and improving health coverage already. As time moves forward, the benefits to working families, small businesses, and large companies only increase.

Executive Office, CalPers,

Sacramento, CA, December 10, 2010.

Hon. Kathleen Sebelius,

Secretary, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,

Washington, DC.

Dear Secretary Sebelius: As the nation's largest non-

federal purchaser of health care, the California Public

Employees' Retirement System (CalPERS) has a keen interest in

national health care reform. From the beginning, CalPERS

supported the reform necessary to contain costs for employers

and their employees while maintaining quality health care.

Many health care elements we have championed, such as

guaranteed issue policies; eliminating co-pays for preventive

services; bans on pre-existing conditions; stabilizing health

premiums; supporting innovative delivery system reforms; and

patient protection against medical bankruptcies are now major

components of health care reform.

We believe that key elements of national health care reform

represent a fundamental and positive shift in the way health

care will be purchased and delivered in the United States.

Together, they will dramatically shape the future of health

care in our country and ultimately benefit everyone.

During our recent open enrollment period, CalPERS

emphasized the benefits of many health care reform

provisions--including extension of dependent coverage,

elimination of lifetime limits, and the Early Retiree

Reinsurance Program. We are writing to share some of our

implementation successes.

(1) Extension of Dependent Coverage to Age 26

In recognition of young adults' need for health care

coverage, CalPERS launched a massive communication effort to

educate and inform employers and members of the extended

dependent coverage benefit. We developed special enrollment

teams, published communication materials, posted information

on our website, and issued press releases highlighting this

new health care reform provision.

Our efforts successfully resulted in more than 27,000 young

adults being added to their parents' health plans effective

January 1, 2011. Best of all, adding them to our program

resulted in a 2011 health insurance premium increase of less

than 1 percent. Families can now rest easier in these

uncertain economic times knowing their dependents, regardless

of marital status, can be covered up to age 26.

(2) Removal of Lifetime Limits

Most CalPERS health insurance plans have never included

lifetime limits on the dollar value of benefits. Further, we

proactively monitored our members who were enrolled in the

few health plans that did include lifetime limits, so we

could work with them to change plans when they approached

these limits.

As a result of health care reform, CalPERS has removed

lifetime limits from all our plans that had included them,

and now our members enjoy more health plan options and less

financial risk.

(3) Early Retiree Reinsurance Program (ERRP)

For years, CalPERS health plans have included wellness and

disease management programs that promote prevention and

manage chronic conditions. These programs, now required of

ERRP participants, mitigate the on-going fiscal impact of

caring for an older population. It's encouraging that these

programs can reduce costs.

Notwithstanding this success, approximately 24 percent of

our non-Medicare medical and pharmaceutical costs are

associated with early retiree health liability. Recognizing

this, the Affordable Care Act included much needed provisions

for relief from these costs. CalPERS 2010 health premium

rates reflected the lowest increase in 14 years.

In anticipation of the Department of Health and Human

Services certifying our ERRP application, CalPERS proactively

negotiated 2011 health plan contracts that reduced premium

increases by more than 3 percent for our non-Medicare plans.

We estimate ERRP will provide premium savings of

approximately $200 million based on reimbursement related to

more than 115,000 early retirees and their spouses, surviving

spouses, and dependents.

We thank you for expeditiously implementing important

health care reform provisions and we are committed to being a

collaborative partner in ensuring the smooth and successful

implementation in the months and years ahead.

If you have any questions regarding our program, please

contact me.

Sincerely,

Anne Stausboll,

Chief Executive Officer.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Gail Steele and Alice Lai-Bitker, who have chosen to retire from their exemplary service on the Alameda Board of Supervisors at the end of this year. Supervisors Steele and Lai-Bitker have served their districts with honor and distinction.

Supervisor Steele has held many positions of leadership in organizations in Alameda County including Alameda County Mental Health Advisory Board; Chair, Alameda Alliance for Health; Chair, Alameda County Children's Memorial Grove and Flag Committee; President of Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum/Area Joint Power Authority; Chair, Local Agency Formation Commission; Executive Committee of the Association of Bay Area Governments; and the Liaison Committee of the East Bay Regional Parks.

She served on the Hayward City Council from 1974 to 1982, and has represented the Second Supervisory District since June 1992. She served as President of the Board of Supervisors from January 1995 to January 1997, and again from January 2003 to January 2005.

Alice Lai-Bitker was unanimously appointed to the Alameda County Board of Supervisors in December 2000. She was re-elected twice by voters in District Three, where she is serving until her tenure ends at the end of December 2010. In January 2009, she was selected by her colleagues to serve as President of the Board for 2009 and 2010.

During her tenure as Supervisor, Ms. Lai-Bitker has been a strong advocate for increasing health care for children. She spearheaded the No Wrong Door policy in Social Services to ensure quick and efficient service. Her work on domestic violence includes A Day of Remembrance, honoring victims of domestic violence and assisting in obtaining federal funds for a Family Justice Center in Alameda County.

Ms. Lai-Bitker chairs the Board's Health Committee and serves on the Social Service Committee. She is a member of the Alameda County Transportation Authority and she represents the Board of Supervisors on the Bay Conservation and Development Commission. She is a member of the Board of the George Mark Children's House, the UC Berkeley School of Social Welfare Community and California State University East Bay Institute for Mental Health and Wellness Education.

Supervisors Steele and Lai-Bitker have many notable accomplishments, and have won many awards for their contributions. I join the community in thanking each of these outstanding women for the significant impact they've had in our community.

Mr. Chair, I rise today to oppose H.R. 4853, the Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010.

Santa Claus is arriving early for a handful of wealthy individuals and industries this year. Wall Street should be throwing a parade today. They can certainly afford one after the President failed to uphold one of his signature campaign promises of letting tax breaks for the rich expire as planned.

We hear a lot of hand wringing about the deficit, but this ``compromise'' extends all of the Bush tax cuts for the next 2 years, adding hundreds of billions to the deficit so that millionaires won't have to pay their fair share of taxes. It also includes billions of deficit financed tax favors to special interests. No one who votes for this package has any credibility left when talking about the deficit.

This bill is skewed toward the very wealthy. According to the Tax Policy Center, the biggest share of the tax cuts will go to the richest families, many with incomes of several million dollars. Households in the top 1 percent of income will see an average tax break that is higher than the annual income of nearly 80 percent of American families. The distribution of the tax savings is disproportionate and just unfair. The wealthiest 20 percent of taxpayers are going to get 60 percent of the tax savings from this extension.

The handouts to the ultra-rich will follow them to the grave. Thousands of millionaires will now be able to die with the confidence that their assets will not be impacted by the estate tax. Without Congressional action, the 44,000 wealthiest families would have paid the estate tax in 2011. Now that the administration has agreed to the most generous estate tax plan in recent history--a $5 million exemption and 35 percent rate--only the wealthiest 3,600 estates are expected to pay the estate tax in 2011. The theme here is clear: the rich will continue to hold more and more wealth and power in this country while the middle class is warned that it will have to accept cuts to Social Security and Medicare in order to balance the budget.

Every business interest imaginable will get their piece of the pie. The corn ethanol industry, which is already guaranteed a robust market by the federal government, will continue to be showered with subsidies to the tune of $6 billion a year. You would be mistaken if you think this handout helps farmers. It is actually paid to the oil companies that blend the ethanol--BP claimed over $500 million from the credit in 2008 alone. And the list goes on. Owners of NASCAR speedways will be able to accelerate their tax write-offs faster than other businesses, rum makers will get an extension of tariff rebates and Hollywood studios will get tax breaks when they produce movies and television shows.

There are good things for working families in this agreement, but they pale in comparison to the gifts to the upper class. Extended Unemployment Insurance benefits will be continued for 13 months and spare millions of Americans from losing their income, allowing them to keep food on their tables and a roof over their heads. Extending improvements made to the Earned Income Tax Credit and the Child Tax Credit made by the Recovery Act also makes sense and will help many families.

A payroll tax holiday will put money into the pockets of people who need it most, but I worry what this will mean for the future of Social Security. The provision also unfairly leaves out thousands of federal workers and teachers in my state of California. It is sad that we have to hand out several hundred billion dollars worth of benefits for millionaires just to find the votes to help working families make ends meet.

Two weeks ago I voted for the Middle Class Tax Relief Act of 2010 that would have extended tax cuts for middle class Americans. I also voted to extend Unemployment Benefits for working people. Those are the bills we should be sending to the President. But the legislation before us today is a colossus, burying those benefits for Americans struggling to keep a roof over their heads underneath billions in blatant handouts to the wealthiest taxpayers. I urge my colleagues to defeat this legislation.

Madam Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to the 20th anniversary of The East

Bay Economic Development Alliance, known as East Bay EDA. On December 2, 2010, East Bay EDA recognized their partnerships, collaborations and achievements, and highlighted the organization's future initiatives and endeavors.

East Bay EDA is a public-private partnership serving the San Francisco East Bay. Its mission is to establish the East Bay as a well- recognized location to grow businesses, attract capital and create quality jobs. It serves as a pivotal point for workforce development, and provides regional initiatives for housing and land use, goods movement, and the development of water infrastructure. It promotes collaboration on regulatory policy between local businesses and government agencies. The organization also promotes business retention best practices among East Bay cities, and has coordinated the Bay Area's efforts to prepare an economic recovery plan to increase the competiveness of the region.

I congratulate East Bay EDA on 20 years of exemplary service as the organization continues to evaluate and modify its work plan to adjust to changes in the workforce, economy, and State and local governments. I send best wishes for many more years of exemplary service.