Floor Statements

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

The Ways and Means Committee has an interest in several of the issues in this bill, and we support the bill. The protection of low-income seniors in Medicare deals with people between $12,252 and $13,782 in income. And when their part B premium is $1,122, they need that protection, and extends that through December 31.

The Abstinence Education program is one that is very important to the Democrats. We've extended it on the theory that if we really enforce this abstinence education, there will be fewer Republicans. So, we support that big time.

The Hospital Perspective Payment System regulation is one of the most important to our hospital community, and we have changed the way we will collect the funds from the hospitals and not collect it all up front. We will collect part of it up front, and then wait until later in the 5-year cycle to see how they behave to collect the balance, which will create less of a financial burden on the hospitals across the country.

I thank all the people who have worked to make this more acceptable for the hospitals.

The 2008 final regulation that governs inpatient hospital payments under Medicare makes important, long-overdue refinements to the system by differentiating payments based on the severity of illness.

In doing so, practice shows that hospital payments are likely to increase hospitals will get smarter about how the document and code their patient cases. There is nothing inappropriate about this behavior, but in order to remain budget neutral, the regulation includes a ``behavioral offset''. The offset was designed to counterbalance the increased spending expected from using the severity- adjusted payments.

I want to be clear that the Committee supports both efforts in the regulation--moving to severity-adjusted groupings and the so-called ``behavioral offset.'' However, the regulation includes a prospective adjustment.

Questions have been raised about the size of the adjustment and whether it should be prospective or retrospective. Those are fair questions, and it seems that a retrospective adjustment would make a lot of sense. However, we are advised it may take CMS up to two years to gather the necessary data.

Given historical payment and coding patterns, we feel it is appropriate to have an interim policy--rather than simply voiding this part of the regulation. As such, this legislation requires a reduction of 0.6 percent in 2008 and 0.9 percent in 2009.

Even with that ``down payment'' from the hospitals, we are concerned that the data in 2010 could indicate a need for a substantial reduction to fully recoup the extra spending that occurs in the next two years. I want to be clear that we have talked with hospitals about this possibility and raised with them the difficulty of addressing that when the time comes. This exercise may simply be forestalling the inevitable, not erasing an unwanted reduction.

We are limiting the amount of the offset now, in order to spread out the payments over time. When that time comes, I do not want to hear complaints about the eventual amount of this adjustment when it comes on-line down the road.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to join Congressman Klein in support of a resolution honoring former Congressman Charles Vanik. Charlie was a dedicated public servant and a great man. From 1955 to 1981, he served the people of northern Ohio with distinction and is an exemplary example for those of us in public office of what it means to be a true representative of the people.

It is hard to say whether Charlie was best known for his signature black suits and bowties or his sponsorship of the now famous Jackson- Vanik amendment to the 1974 Trade Reform Bill. The former made him instantly recognizable throughout northern Ohio and in the corridors of Capitol Hill. The latter, which tied the former Soviet Union's trade status to whether it freely allowed Jewish emigration, allowed thousands of families to escape religious persecution. I personally will always remember Charlie for his strong work ethic and his tireless defense of the American working and middle class.

Charlie spent his 26 years in Congress pursuing policies that gave the American people opportunities to achieve their dreams and rejecting those that allowed corporations to dodge taxes and shirk their responsibilities to their employees. He was so adamant about representing the people instead of interest groups that, after winning reelection in 1970, he vowed to never accept campaign contributions again. Charlie was beholden to no one for his congressional seat except the people of northern Ohio, and it showed in his politics. He returned to Washington time and time again not because of his ability to fundraise, but because of his ability to pass meaningful legislation. Some of his greatest victories included: the section 13 summer school lunch program, the predecessor amendment to the Americans with Disabilities Act, Great Lakes pollution clean-up, a Cuyahoga Valley National Park, the original CAFE legislation, tax reform measures and Social Security and Medicare improvements.

When Charlie passed away late last month, the United States lost one of its greatest leaders. However, Charlie's legacy can be seen in the 110th Congress as we continue to protect our delicate environment for future generations, guarantee all of our Nation's children receive the care they need, and ensure that all people receive adequate healthcare and can retire with security. As one of his former staffers--and later one of mine--Bill Vaughan, recently wrote, ``Like his black suit and bowtie, Mr. Vanik was a classic.'' Charlie was a one-of-a kind leader and I hope today's generation of members can learn from his steadfast pursuit of policies that helped everybody in our Nation achieve the American Dream.

Mr. Speaker, as my distinguished chairman has suggested, this is a modest proposal, with all due respect to Mr. Swift. I am not proud of the bill or the process. I would say to my distinguished ranking member from the Ways and Means Committee that they were accorded every opportunity at every point to participate in this bill, and they know it. They were not excluded until they decided they did not want to help us pass the CHAMP bill, which was a far better bill.

At this point, I have to thank my colleagues on both sides of the aisle who have helped us pass a bill that would have added a million additional children. It was a far better bill for children. It would have expanded coverage to legal immigrant children. It was better also for senior citizens. But I also have to thank our leadership and the commitment of Speaker Pelosi to suggest that when we come back, after, as we expect this bill will be vetoed, we will remember that there were a tremendous number of proposals in here which would have helped not only children, but seniors, financial help for low-income seniors, mental health parity for Medicare, improved Medicare benefits and health benefits, preventive care, rural health parity, consumer protections in part D, improved dialysis procedures, protection of Medicare from privatization, and the preservation of the Medicare system by doing away with the excessive spending in Medicare Advantage.

The allegiance of groups like AARP, the AMA, Families USA, the Alliance for Retired Americans, the National Committee to Preserve Medicare and Social Security, the AHA, all of whom helped us pass CHAMP, all have been ignored in the bill before us today.

I want to make it perfectly clear, I had no part in backing away from not only my commitments, the commitments of many of my colleagues, to these groups or to America's seniors. I know the Speaker will help us return to that commitment and pass those procedures in the future.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 976, the Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act.

As many of my colleagues have made clear, this bill is far better than what President Bush prefers. It will provide $35 billion in new funds for the CHIP program, which will enable 6.6 million children to keep their health care at the end of the month and provide coverage to nearly 4 million currently uninsured children.

President Bush proclaims to want a ``clean extension'' of the CHIP program, but don't believe him on this any more than you did on weapons of mass destruction, ``mission accomplished'' or take your pick of lies he's told. He knows full well that his proposal would mean taking health care away from needy children.

The CHIP program is a block grant so it provides a capped amount of funding to States each year. The existing program is broken. We've already had to pass legislation this year to provide additional funds to keep more than 13 States from dropping children from their CHIP roles. If the President has his way, those States will soon have to take away their health coverage anyway.

That's why I'll vote for this bill today. It is better than the status quo--and far better than the direction President Bush wants to take us all with regard to health coverage.

But, I am not proud of this bill or this process.

On August 1st, we passed a far better bill through the House of Representatives.

First, the Children's Health Insurance and Medicare Protection Act, CHAMP, was better for children. It invested $50 billion into the program and covered more than a million children. CHAMP also allowed States to use Federal funds to appropriately expand coverage to legal immigrant children and corrected a misguided regulation issued by the Bush administration on citizenship documentation that forced thousands of American children to lose their health coverage through Medicaid.

However, not only was the CHAMP Act better for children, it also provided overdue and much needed improvements to senior citizens and people with disabilities on Medicare. In the House, we combined children with seniors and created a bill that improved the health of our youngest and most needy and our oldest.

Unfortunately, Senate Republicans refused to allow our bills to go to conference. They refused to even consider attaching any Medicare provisions to the CHIP reauthorization. As a result, we are here today with a reduced CHIP package that cedes most of the House CHIP reauthorization bill to the Senate's preferred language.

I'm also not certain about whether we will really take up Medicare later this year and adopt the important Medicare improvements we passed in the House.

All of the following provisions from the CHAMP Act are now at risk: financial help for low-income seniors, Medicare mental health parity, improved Medicare preventive health benefits, prevention of the pending physician payment cuts, rural health parity, consumer protections in Part D, improved dialysis procedures, protection of Medicare from privatization through massive overpayments to private plans, and preservation of the Medicare system.

In my opinion, the allegiance of groups like AARP, the AMA, Families USA, the Alliance for Retired Americans, the National Committee to Preserve Medicare, and Social Security and the AHA--which helped us pass CHAMP--have been ignored in the bill before us today.

I want to close by making it perfectly clear that I had no part in backing away from my commitments to any Members of Congress, these groups, or to America's seniors in requesting your support for our broader CHAMP Act. I will do everything I can to see all sections of CHAMP become law. I urge my colleagues in the House and advocates across the country to urge leaders in both the House and the Senate to do the same.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Sergeant Al Lewis on his retirement from the City of Newark, California, after serving over 29 years as a police officer and sergeant and 31 years as a member of the Newark Police Department.

Sergeant Lewis began his career with the Newark Police Department as a reserve police officer in January 1976 and served in this capacity until his promotion to the rank of police officer in January 1978. He was selected as the department's first school resource officer in 1988 and was promoted to the rank of sergeant in February 1991.

Sergeant Lewis was most recently assigned to the Patrol Division, but has also served as a range instructor and supervised the K9 unit. His passion has been the police K9 program, which he is responsible for bringing back to the department.

He has also held numerous specialized assignments during his tenure including patrol officer, traffic officer, property detective, field training officer, weaponless defense instructor, police reserve officer program coordinator, substitute DARE instructor, member of the accident review board, SWAT member, SWAT leader, SWAT sniper, SWAT sergeant, liaison to the Newark communications volunteers, member of C.O.P.P.S. design team, and acting lieutenant for the detective division.

Sergeant Lewis has been a key member of the Citizen Police Academy teaching staff, covering many of the courses taught during the annual 10-week class. He has earned the Reserve Police Officer of the Year award in 1976 and the Police Officer of the Year award in 1982. In addition, he has also received numerous other department awards throughout his career.

I join the Newark Police Department in thanking Sergeant Al Lewis for his years of service and commitment to the City of Newark and the community.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Officer John Boga on his retirement from the City of Newark, California, after serving over 20 years as a police officer and sergeant and over 25 years as a member of the Newark Police Department.

Officer Boga began his career with the Newark Police Department as a reserve police officer in April 1982 and served in this capacity until his promotion to the rank of police officer on June 1, 1987.

Officer Boga was most recently assigned to his third term as the Drug Abuse Resistance Education (D.A.R.E.) Officer. As a D.A.R.E. Officer, Boga has taught a structured D.A.R.E. curriculum to the students in various grades of the eight public elementary schools and one private elementary school in Newark. In 2001, he also became a Gang Resistance Education and Training (G.R.E.A.T.) instructor, which he also taught at the elementary school level.

In addition to his D.A.R.E. and G.R.E.A.T. duties, Officer Boga has also served as an executive board member of the California D.A.R.E. Officers Association, a member of the hostage negotiation and trauma support teams, a member of the California Association of Hostage Negotiators, field training officer, and citizen police academy instructor. He had also held numerous assignments during his tenure including patrol officer, school resource officer, tri-city gang task force officer, Alameda County gang task force officer, reserve coordinator, and first aid/CPR instructor.

Officer Boga has been recognized with many awards, the most recent being the police department's Distinguished Service Medal for his devotion to the department, the community, and the youth in Newark. He was also chosen to become the department's Police Officer of the Year in 1992. Officer Boga was selected as the 2006 California D.A.R.E. Officer of the Year by the members of the California D.A.R.E. Officers Association for his hard work and dedication to the D.A.R.E. program. He was also named the City of Newark Employee of the Year for 2005 for his commitment to the city and for all of his hard work and positive attitude.

I join the Newark Police Department in thanking Officer John Boga for his years of commendable service and devotion to the City of Newark and the community.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to the Alta Mira Club on its 100th anniversary. The Alta Mira Club is a philanthropic project established on December 9, 1907, to benefit women and children. The club is located in the City of San Leandro, CA, and has been creating a positive impact in that community over the past century.

The Alta Mira Club's 60 charter members became a part of the California Federation of Women's Clubs on January 13, 1908, with the adoption of a constitution, bylaws, and elected officers. The Club later joined the General Federation of Women's Clubs, headquartered in Washington, DC, on February 9, 1912.

The Alta Mira Club has a rich history. The members participated in the Suffragette movement and held classes for women on ``how to vote'', helped furnish and plant the grounds of the first San Leandro City library, and planted palm trees in the City, while also continuously engaging in other community, philanthropic, educational, scholarship, and social activities.

The Club purchased the Ygnacio Peralta Home in 1926, receiving California Historical landmark bronze plaque number 285 in 1949. In 1978, the Ygnacio Peralta Home was placed on the national register in Washington, DC. The membership of the Alta Mira Club is the sole support of the clubhouse, where members continue the tradition of providing musical entertainment, poetry, and lectures as a part of its programs.

I congratulate the Alta Mira Club on their 100th anniversary of excellent service to the community, their many accomplishments, and their continued support of civic projects and programs.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in celebration of National Grandparents Day on September 9. In particular, I want to recognize those grandparents that have taken on the extraordinary task of raising their grandchildren. There is no more valuable contribution that any individual can make to our country than raising children in a loving home. The fact that grandparents all over the country do this despite financial and other hardships is worthy of the highest praise.

Nationwide, approximately 2.5 million children are being raised by their grandparents because their parents are unable to care for them. In Alameda County, the area of California that I represent, over 11,000 grandparents are responsible for meeting the basic needs of their grandchildren. Without their grandparents, many of these children would end up in foster care placements usually without contact with their siblings or the support of their extended family.

Grandparents can provide the stable homes that allow children to grow and thrive. Unfortunately, many grandparents are not financially able to take on care of their grandchildren, despite their willingness to do so. The Federal Government has a responsibility to provide the resources willing grandparents need to care for their grandchildren. Our failure to do so will mean that more children enter the foster care system, are moved from place to place, and lose their family and community connections.

In the interest of full disclosure, I must state that I am the proud grandfather of eight.

President Carter created a National Grandparents Day in 1978. Nearly 30 years later grandparents still deserve our highest recognition, but they also deserve our support and assistance.

Madam Speaker, as the dean of the California delegation, it's my privilege, my honor and distinct pleasure to introduce the newest member of our California delegation, Laura Richardson, elected to California's 37th Congressional District in a special election held just recently. Laura Richardson is a passionate critic of the war in Iraq, a supporter of universal health care, and a welcome addition to our delegation.

After three terms on the Long Beach City Council and several years as director for Lieutenant Governor Cruz Bustamante, Laura was elected to the California State Assembly last November. And less than a year later, she won a special election to succeed our dear departed colleague, Juanita Millender-McDonald, and joins us here. It is a distinction that she is one of the few people in the history of this country to serve both in a local, State and Federal post within 1 year. She worked for Juanita as a field deputy, and she will continue her important work to ensure that all Americans can participate in a fair and free electoral process.

Laura's career has many highlights. While on the city council, she was responsible for bringing Long Beach's inner city its first job training center for working families; she championed economic development and improved upon transportation services. And dear to my heart, she helped open the first new bank in the city's central area since the 1992 riots.

In the assembly, she became the first African American woman to serve as the Assistant Speaker pro tempore. In the House, she will keep California's Democratic delegation a majority female; of our 34 members, 18 are women.

She is a member of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, and she joins us as an effective voice for working families in Congress. I look forward to working with her to improve health care for everyone and address the disparities in our health care system, issues I know are important to her and should be to all of us.

At this time, I yield to my distinguished colleague and senior Member from the Republican delegation of California.

Madam Speaker, at this time I would like to yield the balance of my time to the Honorable Laura Richardson, Representative of California's 37th Congressional District.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to the Alameda Creek Alliance on its tenth anniversary. The Alameda Creek Alliance is a non-profit community watershed restoration group within California's 13th congressional district. It was formed in 1997, after steelhead trout in the Central California Coast were listed as a threatened species. The organization has spent the last decade working to restore runs of steelhead trout and salmon to the Alameda Creek watershed, the largest tributary to southern San Francisco Bay.

The Alliance is working with a consortium of a dozen local, State and Federal water supply and land management agencies on projects to restore native fish habitat in Alameda Creek. The efforts of the Alliance have resulted in the removal of four obsolete dams from Alameda Creek and the construction of two fish ladders to allow fish to migrate to suitable habitat upstream. Another dam removal and construction of four additional fish ladders are in the planning stages. These projects will make up to 20 miles of Alameda Creek accessible to ocean-run fish for the first time in over half a century.

The Alameda Creek Alliance, which has grown to an organization of 1,400 members, has organized over 70 local and regional conservation and fly-fishing groups in support of the Alameda Creek restoration. The Alliance educates the residents of Fremont, Union City, Newark, Sunol, Pleasanton, Dublin and Livermore, California about watershed restoration and protection of endangered species and their habitats. The Alliance also trains volunteers for fish rescues, creek cleanups, creek monitoring, and assisting biologists in gathering scientific data essential to steelhead restoration. The Alameda Creek restoration efforts have been featured in over 200 newspaper articles over the past decade.

I congratulate the Alameda Creek Alliance on their 10 years of exemplary service to our community and send best wishes for continued success.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Officer Allen Chan on his retirement from the Police Department in the City of Newark California, after serving 26 exemplary years as a member of the Force.

Officer Chan began his career with the Newark Police Department as a police aide in August 1981 and served in this capacity until his promotion to the rank of police officer in July 1983. He has held many assignments during his tenure, including: patrol officer, explorer advisor, field training officer, traffic officer, homicide detective, acting patrol sergeant, and range master.

He has also been an instructor, teaching several police related classes for over 15 years at Ohlone College and Evergreen Police Academy. He has also taught various subjects for the Newark Police Department's Citizen Police Academy.

Officer Chan is recognized by the court as an expert in accident reconstruction and is a member of the Criminal Evidence Response Team and the High Tech Crime Investigation Association. He has served the Newark Police Association as the president and secretary and the Newark Police Activities League as the Program Director, helping provide a variety of after school educational and recreational activities for the Newark youth.

Officer Chan was most recently assigned to his second term as the School Resource Officer at Newark Memorial High School, where his main responsibility was to ensure the safety of students and staff members.

I join the Newark Police Department, along with Officer Chan's family and friends, in congratulating him for his years of service and devotion to the City of Newark and the community.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of ending senseless tax breaks and subsidies for giant oil and gas companies and making needed investments in clean energy and efficiency. Although I support the energy package before us today, I urge my colleagues to realize that this is a small, first step. There is a tremendous amount of work to be done to confront global warming and shift our nation away from our addiction to fossil fuels.

Today we have an opportunity to greatly increase energy conservation by setting new efficiency standards for appliances and promoting carbon-neutral green buildings. These two steps will prevent as much as 10 billion tons of carbon dioxide from entering the atmosphere. In addition to these measures, I strongly support the Udall-Platts amendment to establish a Renewable Electricity Standard, which will ensure that 15 percent of our electricity is produced through renewable sources by 2020.

In 2006 the top five oil companies raked in record-breaking profits of over $119 billion. As President Bush himself has admitted, there is no need to give oil companies taxpayer-funded subsidies when the price of oil is at or near all time highs. I support the tax portion of the package that ends $16 billion in tax breaks for companies like Exxon/ Mobil and closes the ridiculous loophole that has allowed business owners a $25,000 deduction for purchasing a gaz-guzzling Hummer. The savings generated are then invested in developing clean energy.

My support for the energy package is tempered by the fact that it does not include any increase in our woefully out-of-date CAFE standards. I am also troubled that we are continuing to subsidize corn- based ethanol production. A simple shift from gasoline to ethanol will do nothing to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, but it will eat up open space and continue to drive up food prices.

Both bills make important progress and I urge my colleagues to support them. However, larger changes, such as a carbon tax, are needed if we are serious about stopping global warming.

Madam Speaker, I object to the letter being introduced.

Mr. Speaker, I object.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the right to object. I may discuss it at a later point, but at this time, I must object.

Mr. Speaker, I object.

Mr. Speaker, I object.

Yes, Mr. Speaker, I object.

I object.

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

Much has been said by the distinguished chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee, by the distinguished chairman of the Ways and Means Committee on how this bill helps Americans. Five million kids will receive medical coverage insurance that they don't now have. Seniors will receive preventative care with no copayments. They will receive mental health care at parity. Rural benefits will be extended to the rural communities that need assistance for access to their population. Low-income seniors will receive assistance in paying for their co-pays and their premiums.

This bill is fully funded over 10 years, something my Republican colleagues never did in the past. I want to remind my colleagues that there are many myths being floated around here today. It is important to note that 83 of my Republican friends in 1997 voted for an identical bill. The bill that they voted on has the exact same income eligibility that was passed in 1997. The minority leader, the ranking member of the Ways and Means Committee, the ranking member of the Health Subcommittee on the Ways and Means Committee, all voted for this and included a cigarette tax to pay for it.

And I might added that the reductions that they put in their Medicare bill were five times greater than the adjustments we made in the bill today. It included an increase in the Federal tobacco tax.

Now I don't know what has changed. Maybe they have learned to hate children in the interim, but nothing has changed in the eligibility. It is the same bill. If it was good for you, then it is better now. And it does a fair thing.

The public is sick of radical ranting. They want health care for kids and seniors, and the way to get that is to support the bill before us today.

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

Mr. Speaker, I just remind the former Speaker that he voted for the same benefits in 1997, and nothing has changed since then.

I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin), who remembers what happened in 1997.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Washington (Mr. McDermott), a member of the Ways and Means Committee. Pending that, I would like to point out that he understands that in 1997 the Republican bill had five times greater reduction in Medicare spending than this bill does today, which 83 Members of the Republican party who are still in Congress voted for at that time.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the distinguished member of the Ways and Means Committee, a member of the Health Subcommittee, the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Lewis).

Pending that, I would explain that he knows that the NAACP, in a letter of endorsement, has said that this legislation fills a much- needed gap that currently exists in health care services for some of the most vulnerable citizens, low-income children, seniors and the disabled.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, it was just my intent to accommodate my friends in the minority who have been asking for all this extra time, but I guess if they have lost their speakers, they really don't need any.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. Thompson), a member of the Health Subcommittee of the Ways and Means Committee, who recognizes that the American Medical Association has, in their endorsement, has said that this legislation addresses two of the AMA's highest priorities, providing health insurance coverage for low- income coverage and protecting seniors' access to care by preventing drastic cuts in the Medicare funding for physician services.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the time allotted to the minority members of the Ways and Means Committee be forfeited.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I object.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert in the Record a letter from the Catholic Health Association of the United States, which in part states that: We believe the most important pro- life thing that Congress can do right now is to ensure that the State Children's Health Insurance Program is reauthorized.

I am happy to respond. You are a couple minutes ahead of us, and of course I am dying to hear what my colleagues on the Republican side of the Ways and Means have to say.

If the gentleman would yield.

I think you have just touched on a misunderstanding. We had been led to believe that we would be rotating around among the various committees, and so that now we are kind of out of balance. Our understanding is that we would rotate back and forth between Energy and Commerce and Ways and Means for the full time. I apologize to the gentleman if we misled. Our concern was that we

would be out of balance in the time between the two committees.

Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my unanimous consent request.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Kennedy) for a unanimous consent request.

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

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

I continue to reserve, Mr. Speaker.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Reserving the right to object.

If I could inquire of the distinguished gentleman from Texas, it's my understanding that this unanimous consent request has been negotiated between the majority and minority leadership.

And as part of it that we would proceed expeditiously to use the debate, move to passage, and without intervening stalling motions.

Then I withdraw my reservation.

Mr. Speaker, with this new-found wealth of time, I'm happy to yield 1 minute to the senior member of the Health Ways and Means Subcommittee, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Doggett), who understands that the Lance Armstrong Foundation has urged a vote in favor of 3162, a legislation scored as a key vote for people affected by cancer; and Mr. Armstrong is a constituent of Mr. Doggett.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from California, a member of the Ways and Means Committee (Mr. Becerra). Pending that, I would point out that he is well aware that the National Hispanic Medical Association has endorsed the bill, and I would like to submit their endorsing letter into the Record.

NHMA, National Hispanic

Medical Association,

Washington, DC, July 25, 2007.

Hon. John Dingell,

Chairman, House Committee on Energy and Commerce, House of

Representatives, Washington, DC.

Dear Chairman Dingell: On behalf of the National Hispanic

Medical Association (NHMA), a non-profit association

representing 36,000 licensed Hispanic physicians in the

United States, we write to express our strong support for the

Children's Health and Medicare Protection Act, H.R. 3162,

which will allow the State Children's Health Insurance

Program (SCHIP), Medicare, and Medicaid to expand enrollment

of Hispanic children and elderly. Since one in five Hispanic

children are currently uninsured and only 10 percent of

Hispanics eligible for Medicare are enrolled, these programs

are vital to increasing access to health care.

The mission of NHMA is to improve the health of Hispanics

and other underserved populations. We support the SCHIP

section that allows states to cover legal immigrant children

and legal immigrant pregnant women, covers dental care and

mental health care, provides state performance bonuses if

they can demonstrate that they have enrolled new children who

are currently eligible, but not enrolled, and creates the

Children's Access, Payment and Equity Commission, that will

examine issues of health disparities. We support the Medicare

section that calls for reducing health disparities through

demonstrations for language services reimbursement and

targeted outreach, new quality data relating to disparities,

expands the Low Income Subsidy and Medicare Savings Programs,

and mandates a report on Culturally and Linguistically

Appropriate Standards use by providers. We do not support

total elimination of Medicare Advantage with a Hispanic

enrollment of 21 percent receiving comprehensive care

management and with Puerto Rico covering dual eligibles.

Finally, we support the Medicaid section that increases funds

for transition to work, disabilities, family planning, adult

day care and Puerto Rico.

In summary, the National Hispanic Medical Association

supports the Children's Health and Medicare Protection Act,

H.R. 3161, because it will increase access to health

insurance for Hispanics and will, thus, improve the health of

all Americans.

Sincerely,

Elena Rios, M.D., M.S.P.H.,

President and CEO.

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

Mr. Speaker, at this time, I'm pleased to recognize the gentleman from North Dakota (Mr. Pomeroy) for 1 minute. Pending that, I would note that, as a former insurance commissioner, he understands that the endorsement of the National Association of Insurance Commissions is necessary to prevent fraud in the Medicare Advantage program.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to respond briefly to the distinguished ranking member of the Ways and Means Committee, just to suggest that AHIP, representing America's Health Insurance Plans, wrote to us recognizing ``the ambitious effort will require significant resources. We believe that comparative effective research should be carried out as a public-private partnership, with funding from public sources and support from private sources, including health insurance plans, employers and manufacturers.'' And also to suggest that any recognition of children above the previously stated levels had to be done with waivers from the Bush administration to Governors requesting it.

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

Mr. Speaker, I just make a comment that not all committees are so blessed with ranking members who are so cooperative, and perhaps there might have been hearings in other committees if that were the case.

I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Neal), and Mr. Neal recognizes that the American Academy of Pediatrics has said in their letter that they want to stand with us on this important legislation, and they will work for its passage.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Emanuel) who helped create the CHIP bill. I can't say he was a midwife for it, but he was there at its inception and was instrumental in negotiating it.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer), and he's a gentleman who understands that most of us in Congress whose children are insured are insured by a government-run, taxpayer-funded health insurance plan which we like quite well.

Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Kind) who understands that the National Rural Health Association has endorsed the 2007 CHAMP Act as critical to rural children and seniors across the Nation.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished majority whip, Mr. Clyburn.

Mr. Speaker, at this time I am happy to recognize the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pascrell) for 1\1/2\ minutes, and, pending that, point out that he recognizes that the hospitals and physicians in Pennsylvania overwhelmingly endorse this bill.

Mr. Speaker, at this time, I am happy to yield 1 minute to the distinguished lady from Nevada (Ms. Berkley).

Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to yield 1 minute to the distinguished lady from Pennsylvania (Ms. Schwartz), who understands that the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare has overwhelmingly endorsed the 2007 CHAMP Act.

Mr. Speaker, I am delighted at this time to recognize the distinguished gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Larson) for 1 minute, who understands well how private health insurance companies have overprofited from their overpayment.

Mr. Speaker, I'm happy to yield 1 minute to the distinguished lady from Ohio (Ms. Tubbs Jones). And, pending that, I suggest that she understands that the American Nurses Association has expressed their undying support for the Children's Health and Medicare Protection Act.

Mr. Speaker, as quickly as I can, I would like to recognize the distinguished gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Davis) for 1\1/ 2\ minutes.

Mr. Speaker, at this time, I'm delighted to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlelady from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro).

Mr. Speaker, at this time, I'm privileged to yield 1 minute to the Delegate from the Virgin Islands (Mrs. Christensen).

Mr. Speaker, at this time I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).

(Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, at this time I yield for the purpose of making a unanimous consent request to the distinguished gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Wu).

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

Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Murphy).

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to respond to my distinguished friend from Arizona.

And I have to admit, in honesty, that there are earmarks in this bill. There are 11 million earmarks, six million children whose names we now have and five million children to be added to the bill. And I'm proud to say those earmarks are in the bill.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel).

Mr. Speaker, at this time, I'm pleased to yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Fattah).

Mr. Speaker, at this time, I am pleased to yield as much time as he may consume to the distinguished chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, Mr. Rangel.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, first of all, I take this opportunity before we have closing remarks to thank the ranking member of the Ways and Means Committee and the ranking member of the Health Subcommittee for their comity during all of our discussions and the hearings in the past.

I also want to take the chance and take the time to thank our staff, Cybele Bjorklund; Debbie Curtis; Deb Mizeur; Jennifer Friedman; Chad Shearer; Dr. Gene Rich, one of the most overpaid physicians in the country; Drew Dawson; Dana Sun, our intern from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Karen McAfee; Ed Grossman; Jessica Shapiro; Mark Miller and the MedPAC staff.

I would also like to thank Chuck Clapton, Joelle Oishi and Dan Elling from the minority staff.

I would like to thank also the staff of the Energy and Commerce Committee: Bridgett Taylor, Amy Hall, Yvette Fontenot, Heather Foster, and Christie Houlihan. All of these people contributed to work to see that we could be as fair and as equitable as we could in drafting this bill. I think they can all be proud of both the work and their efforts to see that this bill was fair and equitable.

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

I will be glad to yield back the balance of my time.

I would like to do that if I may.

Mr. Speaker, I am happy to yield back the balance of my time.

I object, Mr. Speaker.

I object.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of pay equity.

The rationale for the Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2007 should be obvious. All people, regardless of gender, race, ethnicity, and religious or sexual orientation, should receive equal pay for equal work.

Unfortunately, that is not the case today in America. African- Americans make only 77 cents for every dollar made by men, black families make about 60 cents of every dollar made by whites, and gays, lesbians and other minorities regularly face discrimination in the workplace.

The Supreme Court's recent decision makes it incredibly difficult for employees to challenge acts of discrimination. The decision limits to six months the period in which victims can challenge their employers and be compensated for discrimination.

Such a time limit was insufficient for Lily Ledbetter, whose pay slowly slipped in comparison to the pay of her male coworkers over a period of nineteen years. It would also be insufficient for millions of other workers, who often learn of pay discrimination only after the fact. The majority of companies do not release information on comparable salaries, making it, difficult if not impossible for employees to determine if wage discrimination is taking place.

In a typicaly shortsighted move, Bush has threatened to veto this bill on the grounds of preventing frivolous lawsuits. The word ``frivolous'' can be used to describe many things, but it most certainly cannot be used to describe a bill that brings the people of this country a step closer to the equality that they deserve. For someone who claims he wants to spread the principles of equality and democracy to the people of the Middle East, it is unfathomable that he would fail to uphold these ideals for the people of this country.

As representatives of a country that was founded on the idea of equality for all, there is no excuse for denying citizens the opportunity to contest acts of discrimination. I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation.