Floor Statements

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

Madam Speaker, this bill will bring some much-needed transparency to the Federal Government. Senate 303 reauthorizes and improves the Federal Financial Assistance Management Act of 1999, which sought to simplify the application and reporting requirements for Federal grants. It requires the OMB and Federal agencies to develop a strategic plan for streamlining Federal grant processes, and it codifies grants.gov, the Federal Government's one-stop-shop for grant announcements and applications submission.

S. 303's new requirements are driven by a GAO assessment reporting that OMB and Federal agencies have made modest progress towards standardizing grant announcements and applications. The government has developed a standard format for grant announcements, began consolidating grant management systems, and set up a Web site, grants.gov. However, it, so far, has failed to develop a common system for a full-scale application, management, and reporting for financial assistance.

Madam Speaker, I appreciate Chairman Towns' willingness to work with us to incorporate language from H.R. 2392, the Government Information Transparency Act, which was introduced by Ranking Member Issa. The provisions that were incorporated from the ranking member's bill will enhance the collection, analysis, and dissemination of business and financial information by the Federal Government through the use of a single data standard. Currently, the Federal Government mandates disclosure of large amounts of information in a multitude of ways. Financial reports in a uniform format will be more transparent and more easily analyzed and critiqued by the public, the media, and the oversight community.

In addition, S. 303 will require grant applications and reports to be made public and prepared according to a single, consistent data standard. For the first time, watchdog groups, journalists, and ordinary citizens will be able to see for themselves the promises and projections that grant applicants make in order to receive taxpayer dollars and then hold them directly accountable. A watchdog group publicizing waste or abuse of taxpayer money could put up a blog post linking directly to applications and reports describing how the money has been appropriated and spent.

A citizen or a news reporter searching for the name of a company might discover that the company had received taxpayer money to complete a local infrastructure project and be able to hold the company directly accountable for the use of public funds. Information about the amount of money requested, the amount of money spent, and progress on taxpayer-funded projects could be computed automatically and easily. Taxpayers could determine how much grant money had been awarded to a local business or nonprofit, and automatically compare the performance of different grant recipients and recognize disparities in grant funding between States or congressional districts.

Madam Speaker, I want to thank Chairman Towns and his staff for working with the Republicans on this important legislation by incorporating bipartisan language to increase transparency in the Federal Government. I also want to commend Senator Voinovich for his hard work on this bill, and I ask my colleagues to support this legislation.

We have no further speakers, and I would yield back the balance of my time.

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

Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of House Resolution 779, the resolution recognizing the goals and ideals of National Runaway Prevention Month. This initiative is sponsored by my good friends at the National Runaway Switchboard and the National Network for Youth.

As the gentleman from Massachusetts mentioned, between 1.6 and 2.8 million youth run away from home each year. According to the National Runaway Switchboard, crisis calls citing economic distress have increased 200 percent since 2006. Incredibly, one in every 50 children will experience homelessness at some point in their lives. And although some youth will return within a few days of running away, others will remain on the streets, never to return. In far too many cases, these children will fall prey to the worst forms of exploitation, including the sex industry. In fact, 30 percent more youth are using the sex industry as a means of survival today than in the year 2000.

There are many reasons why children run away from home. Some are expelled from their homes by their families or separated from their parents because of death or divorce. In other cases, the child may be fleeing from physical, sexual, and emotional abuse at home. Having run away, these youths are now homeless, without means to secure their own basic needs, and are often ineligible or unable to access medical or mental health resources.

There are many individuals and organizations that are doing whatever they can to assist America's runaway youth by providing food, shelter, clothing, and counseling. Others are working with families to prevent a child from running away in the first place. And still others are intervening and advocating on behalf of the children and giving them options other than running away.

With congressional support, the National Runaway Switchboard provides crisis intervention and referrals to reconnect the runaway youth with their families.

It also helps link young people to local resources that provide positive alternatives to running away.

Founded in the Chicago area in 1971, the NRS now provides comprehensive crisis intervention services for at-risk youth nationwide, including a 24-hour crisis hotline.

In 1974, the National Network for Youth was founded to coordinate the work of community-based organizations that now represent hundreds of youth-oriented organizations and advocate at the Federal level, provide information on available services, and train organizations in best practices.

I want to thank Mr. Wolf, Mr. Stupak and Ms. Lofgren, my fellow co- Chairs of the Congressional Caucus on Missing, Exploited and Runaway Children for joining me on this important effort, and I thank the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Lynch) for managing this bill. And I want to thank Mr. Israel, who has worked with me on this important resolution for years.

It is fitting for Congress to endorse the goals and ideals of National Runaway Prevention Month and to highlight the effort of those organizations that work so hard to help the youth of America who have left or who are considering leaving their homes for a dangerous and uncertain life on the street.

I urge my colleagues to support this resolution.

If the gentleman has no further speakers, I yield back the balance of my time

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I rise today in support of House Resolution 942 commending the Real Salt Lake Soccer Club for winning the 2009 Major League Soccer Cup.

Last month on November 22 in front of over 46,000 fans at Qwest Field--you'd think that we were in the UK with the popularity of soccer out there. But the Real Salt Lake Soccer Club won the 2009 Major League Soccer Club, defeating the Los Angeles Galaxy, and the final victory of a remarkable five-game winning streak did not come easily. The Real Salt Lake Soccer Club outlasted a formidable opponent through two sudden-death overtimes and a penalty kick shoot-out en route to a brilliant 5-4 victory. Congratulations.

This victory marked the culmination of a remarkable session for a team that I guess barely made the playoffs and only 5 years ago was a lowly expansion team. In fact, this victory is the first major pro sports championship in Utah for almost 40 years.

Congratulations to the Real Salt Lake Soccer Club, their coach. Jason Kreis--the youngest coach to win a Major League Soccer Cup--and to Utah and their very many, many dedicated fans.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

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

I rise today in support of H. Con. Res. 160, honoring the American Kennel Club for its service to dog owners throughout the United States.

Founded in 1884, the Kennel Club operates the largest registry for purebred dogs in the U.S. and is the country's leading nonprofit organization dedicated to the study of dogs and their care. This organization has 609 member clubs and monitors 4,000 licensed and sanctioned clubs holding events under the American Kennel Club rules and regulations.

I have to say, I did show one dog that I had for a period of time, a basset hound, in Chicago, in the American Kennel Club at one of the shows, and it's quite an experience for anybody to do that. It's well run and well regulated.

The American Kennel Club has taken the lead in promoting responsible dog ownership and breeding practices as well as supporting thousands of volunteers across the country who teach safety to dog owners. In order to maintain the high standards for which the American Kennel Club is known, they conduct over 5,200 kennel inspections each year. And, as Mr. Price mentioned, youth ages 9 to 18 are enrolled in the National Junior Organization, which really helps to communicate the proper handling of dogs and allows them the opportunity to participate in shows at an early age.

It has also created a Canine Health Foundation, which funds research projects focused on the genetics of dog diseases and clinical studies. The club annually awards over $170,000 in scholarships to veterinary students and veterinary technical students and has reunited thousands of dogs with their owners through its Companion Animal Recovery program.

The American Kennel Club has been a part of communities of the United States since 1884 and continues to be a model for teaching responsible breeding, care, and ownership of dogs. So we congratulate the American Kennel Club on its 125th anniversary.

I yield back the balance of my time.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Madam Chair, I rise in strong support of this amendment offered by my colleague from Idaho, which is similar to one that I offered during the Financial Services Committee markup. This amendment is a bipartisan, commonsense alternative to provisions in the underlying bill that would do a disservice to consumers.

One of the lessons that we have learned throughout this process is that bigger, uncoordinated government does not work when it comes to protecting consumers and regulating financial institutions.

Madam Chair, I rise in support of the amendment offered by my colleague from Idaho. Similar to one I offered during a Financial Services Committee markup, this amendment is a bipartisan, commonsense alternative to provisions in the underlying bill that would do a disservice to consumers.

What's the answer to the financial meltdown? How do we prevent it from happening again? What's not the answer is to create another federal agency. We already have the OCC, the OTS, the NCUA, the FDIC, the FTC, the SEC, the Fed, and the list goes on. The underlying bill would layer on a new federal bureaucracy that would allow five D.C. bureaucrats to dictate what financial products and services can be offered to consumers by anyone--from the church offering a funeral payment plan to a plumber charging to fix the kitchen sink.

The personalized services offered by your local 100-year-old community banks, churches, or plumber didn't create the financial crisis. Did our local 100-year-old community banks, churches, or your plumber create the mess? No. But all could fall under the burden of new regulations and taxes imposed by a new agency.

One of the lessons we've learned throughout this process is that bigger, uncoordinated government does not work when it comes to protecting consumers and regulating financial institutions. Instead, it only creates more cracks, confusion, and costs for consumers.

Americans are calling for stronger, smarter consumer protections. But that doesn't mean they want government to run their lives or the businesses in their communities. Nor do they want bigger government, more spending, and limited choice.

Some Members of this body think the government knows best. Others of us believe that with the right information, proper transparency, and full disclosure, families can and do make their own financial decisions. They don't need Big Brother to do it for them.

My colleague from Idaho offers a proposal today that answers the question: what about the consumer? His amendment codifies, expands, and energizes an existing body, a council of regulators, and charges it with a clear mission to better protect consumers. It establishes a mechanism for creating uniform consumer protection rules, maintains enforcement by prudential regulators, utilizes existing regulatory framework with no new bureaucracy or cost to taxpayers or small businesses, and it maintains national standards.

I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Madam Chair, I rise in support of the Republican alternative.

It seems like every time we come down to debate this issue, we begin to focus on past history. History is good because we can learn from that, but I think we need to hear more about what the substantive issues are in this bill, what is happening, rather than to look at the past. We need to get it right, and I think the Republican alternative does that.

There's no question that we have a need to reform the financial industry, but for consumers, for the health of our financial services and the economy, we must get it right. But this bill isn't the answer. There are a few good bipartisan provisions in the underlying bill, but the good doesn't outweigh the bad.

America needs a financial recovery and reform bill, not a permanent Big Brother government bailout program. We need reforms that will facilitate competition in the marketplace and generate more choices for consumers. We need reform that will equip consumers with the information that they need to shop around and make the financial decisions that are best for their families.

We need a stronger regulatory regime to quickly expose, stop, and put behind bars any Wall Street crooks that break the law. And financial firms that fail should do just that: fail through a new, orderly bankruptcy process.

We also need greater transparency and improved regulation for over- the-counter derivatives. We must close the gaps in communication among regulators and give them the tools to be efficient and effective.

We need to get credit flowing again so that small businesses like those in my congressional district can get the financing to expand and create the jobs

that American families need so desperately.

That's responsible financial reform, and our Republican alternative aims to get us there.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Madam Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this restrictive rule.

I filed several amendments to protect taxpayers in the economy from regulatory mismanagement. Unfortunately, they were summarily rejected by the Rules Committee. On a bill of this magnitude and significance, I would hope the majority wouldn't be so eager to shut the door on bipartisan amendments or, for that matter, any good

ideas from Members of any party that would improve the bill.

Thanks to the rule, Madam Speaker, amendments I offered to prevent a shift of U.S. businesses overseas are barred from consideration. My amendments would have preserved language in the underlying bill, a result of amendments that I offered in the Financial Services Committee that unfortunately will be undone by the Peterson-Frank amendment.

The result, according to testimony provided by one of my constituents who is the head of the largest U.S. futures exchange in the world, will be a dramatic shift of transactions out of the U.S. exchanges and over to foreign competitors abroad.

The two amendments I offered at Rules would have safeguarded competition, flexibility, and innovation in the U.S. markets. At a time of record job losses, how can we afford to push businesses out of the country?

My third amendment would have prevented the misuse of housing counseling funds by ACORN and its affiliates. It would withdraw ACORN's Federal housing certification. Given the group's clear link to illegal and inappropriate activities, how can we divert precious resources from legitimate housing counselors working overtime to help struggling homeowners?

Unfortunately, this bill will not allow an up-or-down vote on any of these amendments. Madam Speaker, these issues deserve a full and fair debate and a vote on the House floor. I urge my colleagues to oppose this rule.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to this rule and the underlying bill. This massive financial overhaul would permanently entrench the Federal Government and taxpayers in the very position we have worked to avoid since the beginning of this economic crisis.

We must crack down on illegal, unfair, and deceptive activity, eliminate regulatory gaps, and strengthen the effectiveness of the enforcement agencies. We should create a culture of transparency and accountability on Wall Street that will discourage, not promote, risky behavior, and never ever allow taxpayers to be left holding the bag when those deemed ``too big to fail'' cannot make their obligations. Instead, this bill creates a vast new government agency, permanently codifies the practice of bailouts, and doubles down on government intrusion in the financial sector.

I have joined my colleagues in the Financial Services Committee at every step of the way to offer ideas for smarter, stronger financial regulations, and yet this proposal continues to weaken the economic competitiveness of our markets, limit consumer choice, and place taxpayers on the hook for Wall Street's mistakes.

Mr. Speaker, American taxpayers cannot afford any more bailouts, and our financial markets cannot weather another storm of mismanagement.

I ask my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this rule and the underlying big bill.

I thank the gentleman for yielding me the time.

There's no question and no disagreement among Members from both sides of the aisle that we need financial reform, for consumers, for the health of our financial services industry, and for the economy. But this bill isn't the answer.

In fairness, you can find some good bipartisan provisions in this bill. For example, Mr. Kanjorski and I worked out insurance language to bridge the gap in communication among regulators and address problems with multifaceted businesses like AIG. Mr. Hinojosa and I worked on language to bolster housing counseling efforts at HUD. And the bill contains much-needed credit rating agency reform.

Unfortunately, the good does not outweigh the bad. Today credit is less available than ever, small businesses are struggling to keep their doors open, and a record number of Americans are jobless. According to a report issued yesterday by the U.S. Conference of Mayors, the number of homeless and hungry families is still on the rise.

We need a bill to unfreeze the credit markets so that financing is available to allow U.S. businesses to grow and create jobs. We need a bill to improve regulation. We need a bill to help Americans get back to work so that they can provide for their families and put food on the table.

Instead, Mr. Frank's bill sets us back. It imposes a new tax on financial institutions, diverts financing away from lending and job creation, and creates a permanent Federal bailout fund, TARP II. Successful businesses and taxpayers will pay in advance for the failings of those that are reckless. And guess what? Taxpayers are on the hook once again if there isn't enough money. Does that sound familiar? Of course, because it's more of the same.

This bill doubles down the government intrusion in the private sector, and it increases fees and Federal spending. Instead of strengthening consumer protections, it creates a giant new Federal bureaucracy. Five D.C. bureaucrats will tell groups across America, anyone involved in financial activities, including churches that provide payment plans for funerals, what products and services they can offer. Did churches cause the financial meltdown? No. Why not address the disconnect among dozens of existing Federal agencies before layering on a new one? Are we creating another agency or another problem?

Finally, we need straightforward, over-the-counter derivatives reform. What we don't need is regulation that charges regulators with creating a one-size-fits-all approach to regulatory compliance, enforces unjustified mandates, and kills jobs.

We must crack down on illegal, unfair, and deceptive activity, eliminate regulatory gaps, and strengthen the effectiveness of enforcement agencies. We should create a culture of transparency and accountability on Wall Street that will discourage, not promote, risky behavior, and never ever, ever again leave taxpayers holding the bag when those deemed ``too big to fail'' cannot meet their obligations.

That's what our Republican alternative aims to do.

My Republican colleagues on the Financial Services Committee and I have offered, at every step of the way, solutions for smarter, stronger financial regulations, and yet Mr. Frank's bill steamrolls ahead, threatening to weaken the economic competitiveness of our markets, tie up capital, tie the hands of businesses, limit consumer choice, and place taxpayers on the hook for Wall Street's mistakes.

This bill is an overreach and an overreaction, and it should be thrown overboard. It will cause irreparable harm. We need bipartisan reform to get our financial system and our country back on track. Americans, consumers, taxpayers, job seekers, the homeless, the hungry, and Main Street businesses deserve financial reform. This bill is not it.

I urge my colleagues to oppose the bill and support the Republican alternative.

According to the American Physical Society, science is the systematic enterprise of gathering knowledge about the universe and organizing and condensing that knowledge into testable laws and theories. The success and credibility of science are anchored in the willingness of scientists who, number one, expose their ideas and results to independent testing and replication by others. This requires the open exchange of data, procedures and materials, and, two, abandon or modify previously accepted conclusions when confronted with more complete or reliable experimental or observational evidence.

Adherence to these principles provides a mechanism for self- correction that is the foundation of the credibility of science.

Madam Speaker, the recent emails out of the University of East Anglia on the subject of climate change call into question the scientific integrity of several of the researchers involved in developing the climate science that is being used by decisionmakers around the world. While allegations of fraud and manipulation in the scientific community are troubling in and of themselves, they are even more concerning when the data in question is being used by United Nations negotiators as the basis for a global agreement to limit greenhouse gases. Such a situation should give international and domestic negotiators pause on the eve of the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change in Copenhagen.

Recent events have uncovered evidence from the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia, which show that researchers around the globe discussed hiding, destroying, and altering climate data that did not support their narrow global warming claims. Their emails further indicate an attempt to silence academic journalists who publish research that is at odds with their ideology, and they even refer to efforts to exclude contrary views from publication in scientific journals.

Scientific research should meet high standards of quality and should not be held hostage to the ideologies of those presenting the data. It is beyond comprehension that we would even consider implementing a carbon reduction scheme which will irrevocably alter the economy and lead to more joblessness based on these fabrications. Before we move any further, we must restore scientific integrity to the process.

Recent events really show that this has not happened. The hacked emails provide evidence that researchers suppressed science and data which did not conform to the preferred outcomes. For example, one researcher commits himself to ensuring that no nonconforming science will be mentioned in the IPCC's fourth assessment report. He writes, ``Kevin and I will keep them out somehow even if we have to redefine what peer-review literature is.''

As a senior member of the House Science and Technology Committee, I cannot stress enough how important the availability of objective scientific data is for both decisionmakers and researchers. When it comes to our economy and environment, we cannot afford to make decisions on the basis of corrupted data.

With this in mind, the President should call on the IPCC to establish a robust oversight mechanism governing its work before further climate legislation or regulatory measures are taken. Such action is necessary to prevent future infringements of public trust by scientific falsification and fraud.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 3791, the Fire Grants Reauthorization bill.

As a longtime supporter of firefighters and a cosponsor of this bill, I'm very happy we are considering this important and timely legislation to help our firefighters and our fire departments across the country.

Whether it's a fire, a vehicle crash, a dangerous spill, or even a terrorist attack, our firefighters, men and women, put their lives on the line in almost every emergency situation they come across. The least we can do is to ensure that they have the equipment needed to do their jobs without exposing themselves to unnecessary risk.

Today we have the opportunity to improve two FIRE grant programs: the Assistance to Firefighters Grant program, which provides the departments access to proper training and equipment; and the SAFER program that helps fire departments hire new firefighters.

No time is more important than now to reauthorize the FIRE grant programs. It should be no surprise when I say that the economic downturn that has adversely affected everyone has also hit our fire departments hard. With local tax revenue on a steady decline, fire stations across the country and at home in Illinois are feeling far greater pressure to do more with less. H.R. 3791 will help our frontline responders meet their basic firefighting and emergency medical responsibilities with additional resources for staffing, training, and equipment. In passing this important legislation today, we improve the safety of our communities and that of the men and women who keep us safe.

Mr. Chairman, I urge our colleagues to support H.R. 3791.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this bill which raises health care costs and taxes.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this rule and the underlying bill.

Over the month of August, I spoke with over 20,000 of my constituents about health care, and one subject in particular kept surfacing over and over--the skyrocketing cost of insurance premiums. In fact, a recent survey filled out by over six thousand residents of the 13th District showed that, at nearly 47 percent, rising costs were far and away the number one concern when it comes to health care. Families in my district simply cannot keep pace with ever-mounting health care bills. And it's no wonder when over the past year, health care costs rose at twice the rate of inflation.

Unfortunately, this bill would do absolutely nothing to address this pressing concern. Instead, it cuts seniors' Medicare benefits, taxes small businesses struggling to stay afloat, and places government bureaucracy between you and your doctor.

Fortunately, we're offering a better, commonsense alternative to increase competition, improve portability for those between jobs, and expand coverage for pre-existing conditions--without job-threatening tax increases.

That is why I am very pleased that according to experts at the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, or CBO, our Republican alternative will reduce your premiums by as much as 10 percent. In addition, the bill would save the government $68 billion. You heard that right--it would save the government--your tax dollars--money.

And this bill doesn't have any complicated budgetary gimmicks that will inflate numbers or circumvent accurate analysis. This bill has real reforms like association health plans for small businesses, allowing the purchase of health insurance across state lines, and medical malpractice reform.

In addition, the bill would change current law to ensure that insurance companies can't drop Americans who play by the rules just because they get sick. And no one can be denied treatment because of annual or lifetime benefit caps.

Mr. Speaker, we need reform, not revolution. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting an alternative that will provide real help to struggling Americans.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Madam Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this $1.3 trillion government takeover of health care.

Time and again, the President promised the American people that, if they like the health insurance they have, they can keep it. So I introduced an amendment in the Education Committee that said what he said: if you like the health insurance you have, you can keep it.

The Democrats defeated this amendment with a unanimous vote.

This bill does not keep the President's promise. Instead, it would allow a group of unelected government bureaucrats to determine if the health insurance you have is up to government standards. If they say it's not and if you don't buy what they say you should buy, you will be fined. If you don't pay the fine, it's jail time.

I urge my colleagues to defeat the bill and to, instead, vote for the GOP alternative. Not only does it expand access to those who lack it and not only does it lower costs for everyone, but it cuts the deficit, preserves the doctor-patient relationship, and ensures that you can keep the coverage you have.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of House Resolution 700, expressing the support for the designation of the week beginning November 9, 2009, as National School Psychology Week.

National School Psychology Week takes place from November 9 to November 13 this year. Recognizing National School Psychology Week promotes the importance of providing support for children to help create a healthy, safe and positive learning environment.

The theme of this year's National School Psychology week is ``See the possibilities in you. We do!'' This theme focuses on highlighting the positive work school psychologists do to promote the endless possibilities for academic and personal success in the lives of the students they serve. School psychologists assist the students they serve by helping to remove academic and personal barriers to learning and

by assisting school administrators and teachers in improving the learning environment.

By recognizing National School Psychology Week we show our support for the work school psychologists do to help create a healthy, safe and positive learning environment and to address barriers that prevent learning.

I applaud the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Loebsack) for authoring and bringing this resolution to the floor. I also commend the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Ehlers) for cosponsoring the bill. I am honored to support this resolution and ask my colleagues to join me in voting ``yes.''

I yield back the balance of my time.

I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, my heart goes out to all of the families and friends, to all of those who lost loved ones during the senseless shooting that occurred yesterday at Fort Hood. Nothing can really prepare you for a tragedy like this, especially when the lives of such dedicated young men and women are cut short by unthinkable violence right here on American soil. And one of those young men, Private First Class Michael Pearson, was from a family that lives in my district, Bolingbrook. He served his country with distinction and honor, and his life and sacrifice will be remembered always here in Bolingbrook and across the Nation.

And to his parents and family I offer my deepest thoughts and prayers at this difficult time.

Mr. Speaker, despite the fact that Republicans continue to offer constructive ideas to improve the health care bill, Democrats still insist that we are the party of ``no.'' Earlier today I submitted an amendment to improve the Medicare waste, fraud and abuse enforcement provisions in H.R. 3962, and Democrats will say ``no'' to even allowing my amendment to get an up-or-down vote.

According to a recent report by ``60 Minutes,'' Medicare loses over $60 billion a year to fraud. My amendment would strengthen the Medicare enrollment process, expand certain standards of participation and reduce erroneous payments. There is no excuse for continuing to make payments to empty buildings and businesses that have never existed.

Mr. Speaker, this closed process has prevented me and many of my colleagues, both Republicans and Democrats, from offering intelligent and well-constructed amendments that would save taxpayers money and improve health care access for all Americans.

I urge my colleagues to join me in opposing this government takeover of health care.