Floor Statements

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. Chairman, I have been a practicing physician for over 35 years. I have delivered hundreds of babies. You know, our President once said when asked when does life begin, he said, that is above my pay grade. Well, I can tell you, Mr. Chairman, it is not above my pay grade, and I can tell you as a scientist and as a physician that life begins at conception, and that is often forgotten in this Chamber right here.

Abortion violates the very tenets, the simple tenets of our culture, and that is the killing of innocent life. But here is something else you don't hear much in this Chamber here today. How is it that human beings, how is it that Americans can decide to kill an innocent human life? The way we do it is through dehumanization; that is, we think of that unborn baby to be something inanimate or just a part of the body. I have seen people get more upset about a dying pet than they have in giving up their pregnancy through abortion.

So I say to you, Mr. Chairman, here today that I rise in support of the Pence amendment. Yes, of course, money is fungible. Money goes in one end and then into another account and then on elsewhere. So anything that taxpayers do in terms of giving money to Planned Parenthood is subsidizing abortions. And we know that the American people by a small margin and a growing margin oppose abortion in general, but a wide margin of Americans oppose taxpayer funding of abortion.

With that, I yield to the gentleman from Iowa.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to say in conclusion to my remarks, and I thank the gentleman from Iowa, that tonight we are all getting tired. We have debated for 3 days and 3 nights. But in that same period of time, think about the number of babies who have been killed through abortion, through a sterile area where a doctor goes in and we have the usual

instruments and so forth and the fetus sucked out of the womb and then the mom on with her life.

But we also know that statistics tell us that these mothers just don't go on with their lives, as has been suggested by the other side. The rate of depression, the rate of suicide, the rate of problems with future pregnancies increase dramatically after abortion.

So tonight should be the beginning of the ending of this horrible practice.

With that, I yield back the balance of my time.

Offered By: Mr. Fleming

Amendment No. 54: At the end of the bill (before the short

title), insert the following:

Offered By: Mr. Fleming

Amendment No. 55: At the end of the bill (before the short

title), insert the following:

Mr. Speaker, first of all, I want to bypass the hysterics that have been going on tonight from some of our speakers and let's talk about the things that are important to Americans.

I have the great honor of representing the people of the Fourth District of Louisiana. I have a deep and abiding appreciation for the coastal wetlands and the thousands of jobs that are dependent on the health of the Gulf of Mexico. We in Louisiana understand that the offshore oil and gas industry is critical to our long-term economic survival.

Despite the tragedy of the Deepwater Horizon accident, the citizens of Louisiana support environmentally safe offshore energy development, and they are growing increasingly frustrated, if not angry, at the Obama administration's de facto moratorium that occurs today in the gulf, time delays that recently resulted in a Louisiana Federal judge finding the Department of the Interior in contempt of court. This moratorium has caused the loss of thousands of jobs; it has increased our growing dependence on imported oil, and it has contributed to the accelerated increase in the price of gasoline.

We have also heard an ongoing drumbeat of misinformation about hydraulic fracturing, which is a longstanding practice that has been effectively regulated by the States for over 60 years. In my own congressional district, hydraulic fracturing is necessary for the development of the Haynesville Shale play.

As a result of this energy activity, our local and State tax revenues have increased by at least $900 million in 2009 alone, and more than 57,600 new jobs in Louisiana have been created. Let there be no mistake; if you add unnecessary and strangling bureaucratic red tape to hydraulic fracturing, the net result is less jobs and less energy for this country.

As the chairman of the Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife, Oceans and Insular Affairs, I will be conducting comprehensive oversight reviews, hearings on several job-destroying regulations and policies that are being promoted by the Obama administration.

The most far-reaching and least understood of these policies are those being proposed by President Obama's National Ocean Council, which will add additional layers of bureaucracy as well as a new zoning process for the coastal and marine environments. Yes, actual zoning out in the ocean. The council is in the process of creating a new layer of oversight over both recreational and commercial activities. This effort will either override or replace a number of existing State-initiated cooperative efforts with a federally led planning process based on new Federal guidelines. In addition, the administration has undertaken a process to zone the Nation's oceans and coastal areas. This process could reach far inland and could override local planning and zoning processes.

Clearly, this will have an effect on the jobs and economic livelihood on coastal and fishery-dependent communities and could have a devastating economic impact on a range of ocean users. So, for that reason, I stand in support and urge my colleagues to support this resolution as well.

I thank the gentleman from Minnesota.

Mr. Speaker, repealing ObamaCare is an imperative for four reasons. First, while it increases the numbers under coverage, it will ultimately sharply reduce access to care. Like Canada and Britain, socialized medicine will mean carrying an insurance card that will entitle you only to less choice, longer waits, and rationing.

Second, while the health care system is now hard to navigate, under ObamaCare it will be a nightmare. With over 150 new mandates and agencies controlled by unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats and IRS agents, to whom will we turn when the system fails us?

Third, as yet another entitlement program financed through a Disney fantasy of accounting, it will add to the current entitlement fiasco in Washington, exploding the budget for many generations to come.

And finally, with higher taxes and more constrictions on businesses, employed Americans will continue to decline or become an endangered species altogether.

Let's repeal the worst legislation in a generation, ObamaCare.

I thank my friend from California.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of House Resolution 32. Last week, in an act of cowardly violence, our friend and colleague, Gabby Giffords, was gunned down at a public event intended to give her constituents a forum to express their opinions. While our Nation honors, mourns, and remembers those hurt and killed in this senseless tragedy, it is imperative that we strengthen our resolve as public servants to not let these acts deter us from the important work we do and from who we are.

America was founded on the idea that the people have direct access to their elected representatives, and as long as I serve, I plan to continue that tradition. As Speaker Boehner so eloquently put it, no act, no matter how heinous, must be allowed to stop us from our duty.

Our thoughts and prayers are with Congresswoman Giffords, her family, and all those who suffered from last week's events.

Finally, God bless Gabby Giffords. God bless the victims of this tragedy. God bless this institution. And God bless the United States of America.

Section 2: ``This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within 7 years from the date of its submission to the States by the Congress.''

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to oppose the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell. This has been the policy of the military. It's worked very well for many years. There's been a paucity of study of this, and finally, when we approach the period in which it was going to be once again brought up in Congress, there was a study commissioned which asked questions of many, many people. However, the study was flawed from the get-go. First of all, it did not ask whether this policy should be implemented. It asked the question how should it be implemented.

I am a physician. I come from a medical background. If ever we try to determine what the effective way of treating a disease is, we would never start with the presupposition that this treatment is already the accepted treatment of that. No, in fact we go and study that. This was not done.

But let's talk about the questions a little bit in the study, the study that came out on November 30, really only a few days ago. The question is actually asked in the survey, it asks active duty members to actually divine what they thought was going to happen as a result of this policy. That's an impossibility.

It also sets the stage for social experimentation, a time in which we're at war, when we have all of the logistical problems that go on, and yet here we are dropping in the middle of it this bomb of social experimentation.

Even in times of peace, when we have a major deployment, we actually have a mortality rate. People die even when we have peaceful exercises. But in a day when you're actually at war, just think of the additional headaches of all of the logistical problems that go along with implementing such a policy.

Then there's a question of constitutionality. Gee, how can we do something with the military that we don't do with people at large?

And the Supreme Court has spoken out on this, and they've said that the military is a unique organization.

The military is indeed a unique organization, and that such restrictions, such policies can indeed go forward.

I would just like to say, in wrapping up, a couple of important statistics that I think should be mentioned, and that is that 60 to 67 percent of Army and Marine combat members said that this would be a major disruption if this were implemented.

Seventeen percent of the spouses said they would urge their active duty member to get out. And that certainly negates the argument that somehow we would not lose too many soldiers in this.

So I urge my colleagues today to vote against this.

Well, I thank the gentleman, Dr. Gingrey, and, of course, Dr. Paulx Broun, my other colleague who is here tonight, both gentlemen from Georgia. I want to thank you both and state my appreciation for your leadership and for holding these Special Orders.

You know, we did a ton of these Special Orders back here in the health care debate, and I've got a feeling we are going to be doing a bunch more. Because, in my opinion, my humble opinion--I am just ending my first term up here--but I have a feeling that the health care debate has just begun, that this thing is far from over.

As a preface to my discussion about health care, I want to point out and remind everyone, certainly, Mr. Speaker, the fact that we are in desperate need of reviving our economy, 9.8 percent unemployment.

And as I travel around the country, and particularly in my district, there are three main reasons for that given to me by employers. ``Why aren't you hiring people?'' and this is what they tell me.

Number one, our tax situation is so uncertain, we don't know what to expect, and hopefully soon we are going to put certainty back into our tax policy by not raising taxes a single dime on any individual in this country.

Number two, they tell me that banks are just not lending money. There are many reasons for that. We are not going to get into that tonight, but the bottom line is credit is not available to businesses.

Then, finally, and I think most importantly, is the ObamaCare. ObamaCare has thrown such a monkey wrench into the machinery of the economy of this country, creating such uncertainty and difficulty of planning, that employers are just frozen with fear. We know that as soon as it was passed, immediately, companies began to come out and talk about how it was going to immediately eat into their earnings. We get continuous reports of how the premiums are going to go up for the employees as well as the employers, all things that were guaranteed to us by the President would not happen.

But I will just give you a quick story. I spoke to a gentleman who owns a small company in my district. The name of it is Explo, and they have a very unique kind of business. What they do is they have the responsibility to take that explosive charge that's normally used in a cannon that has, for some reason, grown too old and no longer useable, they actually recycle that. They tear it down and they take the various parts. And, of course, it is an explosive, so they do have some risk in all of this. They have a 5-year contract to dismantle thousands, tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of these explosive charges that actually propel the shell from the cannon to go to its destination.

And he said, you know, I have got a good contract. I don't have a big margin, but I do have a margin that I can make profit. But he said, You know what? With ObamaCare, that margin is totally wiped out. If I stay in business, I am likely to go out of the business and go bankrupt.

So just that uncertainty, just that one little factor can make the difference in a company from maybe $100,000, $200,000 a year profit to losing $200,000 or $300,000, which a small business owner can do maybe 1 year, maybe 2 years. Maybe he can borrow money to get by.

But this is the reality that faces Americans around the country, 700,000 small businesses, when you enter this unknown about ObamaCare, and it just simply freezes the businessman. So I can say FDR, President Roosevelt, had

it right when talking about the Great Depression that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself.

Right now, small businesses, businesses across the land are in desperate fear. They are afraid to make those valuable investments because they just don't know what next week, next month, next year is going to be like. I would say that the largest cause of this is health care, the health care reform.

So just to kind of reiterate that again, Mr. Speaker, we have three things that businesses identify as roadblocks to success and to hiring. One is lack of credit, number 2 is uncertainty about taxation, and health care reform. We are about to tackle the taxes. I think the banks are going to be turning the credit around. So that one thing we have ahead of us is ObamaCare, which is, I think, a big stumbling block to recovery.

I join with my colleagues this evening calling for a repeal to ObamaCare and a return to commonsense reform methods, which we will do with piecemeal legislation one step at a time, incremental reform, testing and listening to the American people, to what they want, rather than forcing it down the throats of those who have to pay for this thing.

I did want to enter in a couple of ideas before we move right into that.

You know, Mr. Speaker, the other side of the aisle oftentimes says to us: well, now, you Republicans, you want to repeal ObamaCare. You mean to say you want to stop what is in it in terms of increasing insurance coverage up to age 26? Do you mean to say that you want to bring back preexisting conditions that would prevent some from getting health care coverage because of chronic disease? Do you mean that you don't want to see insurance expanded? Well, of course not. We don't want to see those things return. That is to say we don't want to see once again that kids up to age 26 for some reason can't get insurance covered by their parents. Of course we don't want to see that. And certainly we don't want to bring back preexisting illnesses to somehow block people from getting care. Those are all things that both sides of the aisle can agree on.

The problem is that the structure of ObamaCare that is so steeped in bureaucracy and so costly and so, I guess, handcuffing if you will of health care in general, health care decisions made by doctors, by the patients themselves, that is so difficult that what you are really getting is a situation where you are throwing the baby out with the bath water. The few benefits that are in ObamaCare are certainly way outweighed by all of the problems.

So of course we would love, after repealing ObamaCare, to bring back some of the things that we on this floor may have unanimous agreement on, and that is never again would we see preexisting conditions that would block people from getting health care coverage.

I thank the gentleman.

Yes, indeed, the bottom line, what we are saying here is that we can achieve all of these laudable goals without the complex bureaucracy of ObamaCare. We can expand health care to many more millions of people without creating an individual mandate and an employer mandate.

Certainly, there are far more efficient ways, as Congressman Broun points out, that we can provide coverage to people who may have preexisting illnesses, ways that are already in place in many States-- excellent programs. I would like to inject just two more possible solutions to this and then segue again into the dismantling of ObamaCare that you, the other gentleman from Georgia, referred to.

No. 1: Health Savings Accounts.

HSAs grew by 25 percent in 2009 to a total of 10 million Americans. Americans love health savings accounts. They are working. We implemented it in my own companies back home 6 years ago, and it has totally flattened out our premiums. The problem with it is that ObamaCare begins to tax it as much as 10 to 20 percent.

Believe it or not, today, of course, pre-ObamaCare, you can go and buy aspirin or any type of over-the-counter medication--cold medication--you want, and you can pay for it with your health savings account. However, beginning in January, in order to do that, you've got to get a prescription from a doctor for a nonprescription drug.

Now, how is that going to play in our offices back home when we have hundreds and maybe thousands of citizens and patients calling, saying, I need a prescription for Tylenol so I can get it on my health savings account? So you can see just how ridiculous that is going to be. People are not going to be willing to come in and certainly pay for a doctor's visit just to get a prescription for Tylenol. So that is No. 1.

I introduced H.R. 5126, the Helping Save Americans' Health Care Choices Act, which would restore flexible savings accounts and health savings accounts. I'd love to see us follow through on that.

The second point: the gentleman, Congressman Gingrey, Dr. Gingrey, and I worked on H.R. 5690--and the gentleman showed great leadership on that--which is the Meaningful End to Defensive Medicine and Aimless Lawsuits Act of 2010.

Once again, President Obama promised us that he would reform medical malpractice in ObamaCare; and, of course, that was left on the cutting room floor. Once again, real solutions are being ignored in favor of bureaucracy and mandates.

So, with that, I'll segue back.

Thank you. I appreciate you throwing number four to me, because that's the one that I think gets my gall the most, quite frankly.

Mr. Speaker, you realize that in ObamaCare half a trillion dollars is taken from Medicare. And this is not just window dressing; this is real cuts that are occurring actually as we speak, are actually being scheduled, starting with psychiatric care, including care for assisted living, home health care. Virtually nothing is being touched.

And that so-called half a trillion of savings that's being taken out of Medicare is being used to do two things: Number one, to tack on the end of Medicare because it's running out of money in 6 years, to extend the life. And I still, after a year, cannot get an explanation on how you take the money out of something and add it back in and make it last longer. I know I could try that budget at home and it would never work. Secondly, the same money is being counted again in this bookkeeping scam that will subsidize the middle class, lower-income class in terms of their private health care. So this is just more gimmicks, more Washington gimmicks that is going to hurt a lot of people.

Yes, sir.

I thank the gentleman.

But even before we get to those cuts, it's already steeply increasing the premiums of average, everyday citizens. There is no way that you can cover an additional 32 million Americans--I mean, this is an empirical fact: There is no way you can increase the coverage, add to the coverage of 32 million Americans, and raise, through special interests, all the additional bells and whistles into those plans and not see the costs go up. And why in the world the American people could ever get hoodwinked into believing that I don't know. And I don't think they did, which is, frankly, why they want, by a vote of 60 percent in the polls, they want us to crush ObamaCare and replace it with something that is common sense, free-market based, that leaves the decisionmaking up to the patient, and that is efficient rather than, again, some government-controlled program.

We know that, also, finally--just kind of a final comment because I know we're getting close to the end, but increased coverage does not mean increased access to care. We know this. There are countries around the world--our neighbor to the north, Canada, has 100 percent coverage but they do not have 100 percent access to care. They have to wait often well past the time frame in which it takes to actually adequately treat a condition; therefore, no access. So what good is coverage when you don't have access? And we're going in that direction.

So I suggest, Mr. Speaker, that we repeal ObamaCare and replace it with something that will properly match the efficiencies of the system, allow it to be patient driven, and that people get timely care at an affordable cost.

Mr. Speaker, on November 2, Americans sent a message to Washington that we are sick and tired of the out-of-control spending and bigger government that has existed over the last 2 years. While the lame duck Congress has unfinished business to complete, such as permanently extending the current income tax rates, Democrats in Congress have hinted at other plans to continue their irresponsible spending spree by passing a massive omnibus spending bill.

Mr. Speaker, after the bell-ringing on November 2, surely Democrats in their few remaining days of control are not intending to use this lame duck session to continue the failed policies that got us into this mess to begin with. I implore this body to act immediately to cut spending, balance the budget, extend the current tax rates, and send this Nation on a new path to greatness while ensuring the people's voice is once again heard in Washington.

Mr. Speaker, in just a few weeks, the Obama tax hike time bomb, otherwise known as the expiration of the current tax cuts, will explode, resulting in the highest single tax increase in U.S. history.

For some, it is tempting to accept the argument that increasing taxes on upper incomes and small businesses will solve our deficit problems. However, any clear-thinking American knows that confiscating more money from Americans through taxes to feed a rapidly growing government will only lead to a continued death spiral of increased taxes and expanding government. Ultimately, we will have a shrinking private sector and fewer jobs.

Mr. Speaker, on November 2, the American people spoke loudly, and they said that we are in desperate need of reform in the way this government does its business. To that end, let me suggest that instead of making tax cuts temporary and spending permanent, that we make tax cuts permanent and spending temporary. It is time for Congress and the President to put the American people first and extend permanently all of the current tax cuts for families and small businesses in order to make this economy sound for generations to come.

I thank the gentleman from Louisiana for yielding me this time.

Mr. Speaker, I have two special investments in this bill, Improving Access to Clinical Trials Act. One is being a physician, a family physician for 34 years. The other is that I have a grandson who was born with cystic fibrosis almost a year to the day. He was born essentially clinically dead. His bowels, his colon had ruptured in utero as a result of his cystic fibrosis. He was delivered. It was an emergency delivery. He spent the first two months of his life in the NICU. Several times we thought we would lose him. He has had a rocky course since then. Today, as a child of a year old, he is catching up with all of his developmental milestones. His health is good, relatively speaking. And he is a beautiful young blessing to my family. He still has a very rocky course.

We know some of the statistics having to do with cystic fibrosis. There are approximately 30,000 people today with this disease. In the 1950s, children rarely lived beyond kindergarten with this disease. Today, the average age is 37. We see people even in their sixties with cystic fibrosis. More than 30 percent of the potential therapies that we have are in the CF drug development pipeline today, many wonderful therapies. We can even see over the horizon that we may some day have a cure within our lifetime.

In the next 2 to 3 years, we will need more than 7,000 cystic fibrosis patients to participate in the clinical trials. So this problem that we have today with the fact that reimbursement from these clinical trials can ratchet down on one's SSI payments or Medicaid or Medicare is, of course, I think, a real impediment, a real blocking stone, for developments and strategies and therapies that we have for our clinical trials.

Again, Mr. Speaker, I stand with my colleagues today on both sides of the aisle for this very bipartisan bill that we support, the Improving Access to Clinical Trials Act, and I urge each and every one of my colleagues to vote in favor of it.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the hard work and dedication of a local Louisiana manufacturer. The manufacturer that I am recognizing has demonstrated innovation in manufacturing operations and business growth, as well as a commitment to community involvement.

Continental Structural Plastics (CSP), LLC--Sarepta located within my district in Louisiana, has invested over 10,000 training hours to prepare their workforce for today's advanced manufacturing technology and to be positioned for the next generation of manufacturing. The economic impact that CSP--Sarepta brings to North Louisiana is significant. The facility employs 195 people with an annual payroll and benefits exceeding $5 million. Since construction began in 2001, $12 million has been invested in facility and equipment modernization. This local manufacturer has made noteworthy advances in productivity throughout their organization resulting in substantial growth. Because of these accomplishments, CSP--Sarepta will be recognized for excellence by the Manufacturing Extension Partnership of Louisiana (MEPOL) at the fifth annual Platinum Award for Continued Excellence (PACE) ceremony on August 26th, 2010.

MEPOL, a non-profit manufacturing resource based at the University of Louisiana at Lafayette, provides business and technical solutions to emerging and established manufacturing firms through the state of Louisiana. Since 1997, MEPOL, based on a philosophy of education, encouragement, and empowerment, has worked with manufacturers such as CSP--Sarepta to increase their productivity and profitability.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the hard work and dedication of a local Louisiana manufacturer. The manufacturer that I am recognizing has demonstrated innovation in manufacturing operations and business growth, as well as a commitment to community involvement.

Continental Structural Plastics (CSP), LLC--Sarepta, located within my district in Louisiana, has been providing innovative and technical solutions to Louisiana manufacturers since 1997. The economic impact that CSP-Sarepta brings to North Louisiana is significant. The facility employs more than 1180 people with an annual payroll of $5 million. This local manufacturer has made noteworthy advances in productivity throughout their organization resulting in substantial growth. Because of these accomplishments, CSP-

Sarepta a will be honored by the Manufacturing Extension Partnership of Louisiana (MEPOL), with the Fifth annual Platinum Award for Continued Excellence, PACE Award.

MEPOL, a non-profit business resource based at the University of Louisiana at Lafayette, serves to provide business and technical assistance to emerging and established manufacturing firms throughout the State of Louisiana. Since 1997, MEPOL, based on a philosophy of education, encouragement, and empowerment, has worked with manufacturers such as CSP-Sarepta to increase their productivity and profitability.

I thank the gentleman.

Mr. Chairman, on the CLEAR Act, in my opinion, this is a textbook case on how to kill jobs and raise energy prices.

Reforms are needed to ensure American offshore drilling will be the safest in the world, but this bill is extremely premature. The investigations are still ongoing, and we do not have the answers to the question, what went wrong?

I am greatly concerned, too, that this will further harm Louisiana. The State of Louisiana has estimated that a moratorium like the one currently imposed could result in a loss of more than 20,000 Louisiana jobs. Rigs are already leaving the gulf for countries like Egypt and the Congo. Yet today's bill imposes a permanent de facto moratorium by including provisions to delay or block offshore drilling and imposing taxes that will raise energy costs. Killing jobs and raising energy prices are the wrong direction.

I urge my colleagues to vote against the CLEAR Act.