Floor Statements

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

I rise for the purpose of a colloquy regarding an amendment that I had intended to offer relating to military families.

Mr. Chair, our military personnel have access to great health care through TRICARE, but in certain cases--and many would be surprised to learn this--TRICARE does not cover every health service. And this comes into play sometimes with children of military families with special needs. There's also a circumstance when someone in the military is separating from the military but they don't have retirement benefits, and their family, their children, may not have access to health insurance.

I ran into this in a case back home in Tampa, Florida, at MacDill Air Force Base, not unlike many of our colleagues here who participate in forums for veterans and job fairs and the like. The military health folks didn't know a lot about Medicaid or the Children's Health Insurance Program, whether it applied to military families that they talked to all of the time or those families that are separating from the military and are no longer covered by TRICARE. So we tried to investigate this with the Pentagon a little bit, but they were not able to clarify anything for us.

I have done a little research. There was one report, entitled, ``Medicaid's Role in Treating Children in Military Families.'' That report advised that 1 in 12 children from military families rely on Medicaid for some health service; and for children with special needs in the military families, 1 in 9. I was surprised to learn that, frankly. Plus, we have many that have served in the military and have come back from Iraq or Afghanistan and have a lot of questions about what it means for them finding a job, finding coverage for their family as they move on in their lives.

So I had intended to offer an amendment that simply clarifies the fact that nothing prohibits DOD from providing that information at a job fair, a health fair, or advising military families that the Medicaid coverage or the SCHIP coverage could be an option. So I would really like to work with Chairman Young, the Department of Defense, and Ranking Member Dicks so that our military families don't have to worry about health coverage, whether they're in the military, they have children, children with special needs, or they're separating from the military and they just simply need answers to questions about where they can turn.

I yield to the chairman.

Mr. Chair, I thank the chairman. And this is especially meaningful coming from Chairman Young. No one has been more attentive to military families and our servicemembers--no matter what service, no matter their veteran status--than Mr. Young, my colleague and friend from Florida.

I thank the gentleman and yield back the balance of my time.

Offered By: Ms. Castor of Florida

Amendment No. 24: At the end of the bill (before the short

title), insert the following:

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor an American hero who is being laid to rest back home in Tampa, Florida, today. Staff Sergeant Ricardo Seija was killed on Sunday, July 8, when his armored vehicle struck an improvised explosive device. Staff Sergeant Seija was 31 years old.

Known as Ricky, Sergeant Seija was a graduate of Leto High School. He joined the Army in 2000 and was assigned to the 978th Military Police Company, 93rd Military Police Battalion, Fort Bliss, Texas.

His mother, Ignacia, said, ``Since he was a child, he wanted to defend his country. He very much loved liberty. He wanted a free country without war, without problems.''

``Ricky died like a hero, fighting for his country,'' she said, ``not just for his country but for all of us who live in America. He loved this country very much.''

He is survived by his wife, Sunny; son, Ricardo; his mother and father, Ignacia and Ricardo Seija of Tampa; and two older brothers, Jose and Eduardo.

On behalf of the Tampa Bay community, I salute Staff Sergeant Seija for his service and for his ultimate sacrifice to our great country, and I ask that all Americans recognize this remarkable patriot.

Mr. Speaker, I'd like to thank Chairman Pallone for yielding the time.

He started off the debate by saying this debate reminds him of the movie ``Groundhog Day.'' I think he's right. It reminds me of a summer rerun. Republicans are forcing another political debate on the Affordable Care Act--a tired rerun--when the Republicans should be joining us in focusing on creating jobs and boosting the economy.

That is our number one priority this summer.

It's a real shame. In fact, it's disheartening to hear my Republican colleagues urge repeal of vital consumer protections for American families. My Republican colleagues are undermining the economic security of middle class families in doing so. They are urging the elimination of important improvements to Medicare, like closing the doughnut hole, putting cash back into the pockets of seniors who need it at this time. And what they're saying is that it's okay that people don't take personal responsibility for their health and their health care, and I think that's wrong. It is not fair that if you pay those health insurance premiums time after time and those copays, that you end up picking up the tab for those who do not. That's not fair. The Affordable Care Act targets that for replacement and encourages personal responsibility.

I urge my Republican colleagues not to waste our time here, but let's come together. Let's work and focus on improving the economy and creating jobs. That really is our number one priority.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the achievement and career of Colonel Dennis L. Beatty. Beatty is the current Deputy Command Surgeon, Headquarters Air Mobility Command, Scott Air Force Base, Ill. In this capacity he serves as AMC Command Surgeon in the Surgeon's absence to advise and represent the AMC commander on all aspects of the command's medical service mission. This includes supervising and monitoring the peacetime healthcare at AMC's 12 community-based medical treatment facilities comprised of approximately 6,600 medical personnel who provide health care for more than 429,000 beneficiaries using an operating budget of $672 million and assets exceeding $1.3 billion. He also serves as 18th Air Force (AFTRANS) Surgeon.

After serving assignments in Texas, Colonel Beatty was competitively selected for an Air Force Institute of Technology scholarship in 1992 and was admitted to the Washington University Health Administration Program in 1993. In 1994, he was accepted into the Washington University School of Engineering under a dual degree program in Information Management. He successfully completed masters' degrees in Health Administration and Information Management in June 1995, both with honors.

Upon graduation, Colonel Beatty was selected for assignment to the 375th Medical Group at Scott AFB, Ill., as the Resource Management Flight Commander. He was assigned to the Medical Manpower Division, Directorate of Programs and Resources, Office of the Surgeon General, Bolling AFB, D.C. from June 1997 to July 2001. Colonel Beatty served as commander of the 45th Medical Support Squadron from July 2001 to July 2003. In July 2003, he assumed command of the 42nd Medical Support Squadron at Maxwell AFB, Ala. In July 2005, Colonel Beatty became Chief of the Medical Programming Division, Directorate of Plans and Programs, Office of the Air Force Surgeon General. Colonel Beatty became the commander of the 6th Medical Group on 3 July 2008. From Dec. 2009 to June 2010 he was deployed as the Deputy Group Commander of the 332nd Expeditionary Medical Group at Joint Base Balad, Iraq.

Colonel Beatty was the previous commander (CEO) of the new clinic at MacDill Air Force Base (6th Medical Group) from 2008-2011. In his current position at Air Mobility Command headquarters in Tampa, FL, he continues to oversee medical operations at MacDill as well as all other Air Mobility Command hospitals and clinics at Travis AFB, CA; Scott AFB, IL; McGuire AFB, NJ as well as others.

The Tampa community and MacDill Air Force Base are proud to recognize Colonel Beatty for his outstanding career and his many significant contributions to the Air Force and our country. His determination and hard work have made him an inspirational leader within our nation's Armed Services. I ask that you and all Americans recognize such a remarkable patriot for his service to his country.

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

Madam Speaker, the ranking member of the Energy and Commerce Committee asked me to convey that he has no objection to the bill. Mr. Aderholt's bill provides the flexibility for walk-in coolers and walk- in freezers to meet the applicable energy-efficiency standards with technologies other than foam insulation. The bill ensures that the alternative technology reduces energy consumption at least as much as the insulation that is currently required. We think this is a reasonable approach, encourage Members to support the bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, if the other side of the aisle has no further speakers, then I'm prepared to yield back.

I urge a ``yes'' vote on the bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Missouri and also my colleague from Texas. I rise in strong support today of H.R. 3276, a bill to name the post office located at 2810 East Hillsborough Avenue in Tampa, Florida, as the Reverend Abe Brown Post Office. I introduced this bill to honor the life and the accomplishments of the late Reverend Abe Brown. Reverend Abe Brown was an educator and a pastor, and he devoted his entire life to helping others, whether it was in the classroom, in the guidance office, on the football field, in church, or through his ongoing ministries.

Reverend Brown was a Tampa native. He was a 1946 graduate of the great Middleton High School and a 1950 graduate of Florida A&M University. He came home after he graduated from A&M and started work at Hillsborough County public schools. He worked for the school district for 38 years--as a teacher, coach, dean of students, and an administrator.

As an educator and a coach, he promoted 16 athletes to professional football. He loved football. These professional players attribute their success in life and not just on the football field to the firm foundation and inspirational teachings of their beloved Middleton High School coach, Reverend Abe Brown.

I had the honor of attending Hillsborough's Chamberlain High School when Reverend Brown served as the dean of students before he retired in 1988, and he was tough. He was tough on the outside, but inside he had a heart of gold. Reverend Brown also served as the pastor for the First Baptist Church of College Hill for many years.

His deep and abiding faith called him to found the Prison Crusade Ministries, which was renamed the Reverend Abe Brown Ministries, Inc., a nonprofit organization that enables offenders, ex-offenders, their families, and others at risk to achieve productive and spiritually fulfilling lives. It has made a real difference throughout the Tampa Bay area.

Reverend Brown continued his social outreach, and in 1991 he received nationwide coverage and honor through an article in the Reader's Digest regarding his active establishment and implementation of an effort to stop drug street sales in Tampa's College Hill community.

Reverend Brown passed away in September 2010 after serving the Tampa Bay area in many capacities for many years.

With the help of the East Tampa community, we fought to keep this particular post office open last summer. It was considered for closure, but it is a real focal point for the East Tampa community, and it is a very busy branch. So I look forward to dedicating this station to Reverend Abe Brown, as does our entire community. He was a role model for young people and an inspiration for our entire community. He selflessly devoted his life to others and, instead of abandoning those who had lost their way, he worked tirelessly to help them get back on track.

I thank the entire Florida delegation who sponsored this legislation on a bipartisan basis, I thank the committee, the ranking member and the chair, and I ask my colleagues to support H.R. 3276 in honor of Reverend Brown's selfless service to the Tampa Bay community.

I thank the gentleman from Colorado for yielding the time.

Madam Speaker and colleagues, I rise to oppose the rule and the underlying bill for three primary reasons. First, the package is very poor public policy. Second, I offered a commonsense amendment, and the Republican majority blocked it from being debated, so it will not be heard today, unfortunately. And third, the House of Representatives shouldn't be wasting its time on a

package that's not going anywhere. Instead, we should be focused on job creation, especially passage of the transportation bill, through which we could create thousands and thousands of jobs across the country.

But first, as we marked up part of this package in the Energy and Commerce Committee, it became apparent that this package is chock-full of detrimental policy decisions for America. It creates new bureaucracies when it comes to energy policy and undermines the Nation's energy security. It rolls back policies that support the continued growth of safe and responsible energy production in the United States. And it improperly removes protections that we enjoy under the Clean Air Act that protect the health of American families all across this great Nation.

Second, if my colleagues recall, following the BP Deepwater Horizon blowout in the Gulf of Mexico, a major flaw in the law came to light: that the Department of Interior's maximum penalty for companies violating offshore drilling laws is limited to $40,000, and for major onshore drilling violations, it's only $5,000. So these amounts are not enough of a deterrent for bad behavior. That's why I offered an amendment to give the Secretary of the Interior the authority to increase civil fines against oil companies that violate the law while drilling. But unfortunately, my Republican colleagues have once again blocked sensible policy in order to protect Big Oil.

The Deepwater Horizon disaster was a major economic blow to my home State of Florida. If our laws do not establish appropriate deterrents, then you put our jobs at risk. Our tourism industry, small businesses, restaurants, fishermen, and the military rely on clean water and clean beaches. And our laws should protect American families and businesses, and not just Big Oil.

Finally, I strongly disagree with the Republican majority's decision to block the transportation bill and the thousands and thousands of jobs that are dependent on it. The Republican inaction on a bill that passed the United States Senate in a bipartisan way with over 70 votes is being blocked here on the floor of the House, and people should be up in arms. At a time when we've got to make greater progress when it comes to putting people back to work, that's the best path forward. I think the Republican inaction is causing great economic harm across the country, and that is what we should be debating today.

Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to the Rule and urge a ``no'' vote on the flawed bill my Republican colleagues will bring to the floor. They had an opportunity to bring the bipartisan Senate Violence Against Women Act, but chose not to.

The Violence Against Women Act has been bipartisan and noncontroversial for almost 20 years now. The update passed the Senate on a bipartisan basis just last month.

Why does everything have to be a partisan fight? Over the past year, my Republican colleagues in the House have blocked an important jobs package, stalled the national transportation and infrastructure bill, dragged their feet on help for students and the impending increase in the student loan rate, and now they have turned what has been a bipartisan effort to protect the victims of domestic violence into a senseless political fight.

Republicans would not even allow debate on any amendments so we could address its flaws.

In fact, their legislation not only rolls back longstanding, bipartisan provisions, but it leaves out protections for our LGBT community, Native American women and immigrants.

Unlike the bipartisan Senate version, the House Republican bill does not include a provision prohibiting any Violence Against Women Act funds from discriminating against anyone based on their sexual orientation.

The House Republican bill also does not include language explicitly including the LGBT community in the ``STOP Grant program'' that provides funds to domestic violence service providers.

Studies have shown that the LGBT victims face discrimination when accessing domestic violence services.

We should be working towards stronger domestic violence protections for the LGBT community--not trying to exclude them from domestic violence protections, as the Republican bill would do.

One in four women will experience domestic violence in her lifetime. Many of these domestic assaults go unreported by the victims for fear of retaliation by their abuser.

Immigrant victims are oftentimes the most vulnerable to this cycle because their abusers use their immigration status as a tool to manipulate and control them.

That is why in the 1994 Violence Against Women Act Congress included the ``self-petition'' provision to ensure that immigrant victims of domestic violence could leave their abuser without fear of losing legal status.

The Republican bill would delay and deny that protection for many immigrant victims.

In my home state of Florida there were 113,378 crimes of domestic violence reported in 2010.

If the Republican bill were to pass, more domestic violence crimes would go unreported, more abusers would be free, and more victims would be harmed.

More children, families, and women would be at risk of continued abuse by their abuser.

This bill works in opposition to the very purpose of the legislation--to protect victims of domestic violence.

Not just some victims--all victims.

So advocates across the country who are on the front lines in aiding women and victims everyday have announced their opposition. Please defeat the rule, so that we can call up the bipartisan, improved version from the Senate.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to the rule and urge a ``no'' vote on the flawed Violence Against Women Act that my Republican colleagues will bring to the floor.

They had an opportunity to bring the bipartisan Senate bill to the floor, but chose not to do so. That's a shame, because the Violence Against Women Act has been a bipartisan and noncontroversial effort for almost 20 years now. The update passed the Senate on a bipartisan basis just last month.

Why does everything have to be a partisan fight here on the floor of the House? Over the past year, my Republican colleagues here in the House have blocked an important jobs package; they have stalled the adoption of the national transportation and infrastructure bill; they've dragged their feet on help for students and the impending increase to the student loan rate; and now they have turned what has been a bipartisan effort to protect the victims of domestic violence into a senseless political fight. Republicans would not even allow debate on amendments so that we could improve their flawed bill. And this is serious, because in my home State of Florida, there were over 113,000 crimes of domestic violence reported in 2010. If the Republican bill were to pass, more domestic violence crimes would go unreported, more abusers would be free, and more victims would be harmed.

This bill works in opposition to the very purpose of the legislation to protect all victims of domestic violence. Not just some victims, but all victims. Advocates across the country who are on the front lines in aiding women and victims every day have announced their opposition.

Please defeat this rule so we can call up the bipartisan and improved version from the Senate.

I thank the ranking member.

Mr. Speaker, two of the most prominent independent scholars on Congress, Thomas Mann and Norm Ornstein, recently completed a detailed research initiative. They've never been shy in criticizing either side of the aisle. But their latest research concluded that the Republican Party has become ``ideologically extreme; scornful of compromise; unpersuaded by conventional understanding of facts, evidence, and science.'' And they said:

When one party moves this far from the mainstream, it makes

it nearly impossible for the political system to deal

constructively with the Nation's challenges.

The Republican budget is a perfect example of that. The Republican budget shields special interests from participating in deficit reduction, and instead says, We want to end Medicare as we know it. We target children and our older neighbors and middle class families for the overwhelming burden of deficit reduction.

If a political party wanted to undermine the health and economic security of millions of American families, well, then, this is the way to do it. And it's too bad, because I believe Democrats and Republicans agree on the need for deficit reduction, but we have starkly different visions on how to get there. Others have called this Republican budget extreme, reverse Robin Hood, destructive, and a threat to middle class security.

And here's an example. In the Budget Committee, I offered an amendment to say, It's time. We don't have the luxury to be giving big oil companies tax breaks any longer. Instead, let's make sure that children across America can see a doctor, can get the immunizations that they need. But what was the vote? The Republicans rejected that commonsense amendment. It was paid for by eliminating these Big Oil subsidies.

This is what Thomas Mann and Norm Ornstein mean by they are ``ideologically extreme.'' It's not in keeping with our values, as Americans. And I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the Republican budget and sequestration plan.

Mr. Speaker, today I rise to recognize and commend the efforts of the Spread the Word to End the Word Campaign; a grassroots organization founded by college and high school students toward promoting greater awareness and respect for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities.

Created by young people with disabilities and their typical peers, Spread the Word to End the Word promotes the undeniable truth that everyone matters, everyone is accepted and, most importantly, everyone is valued. Today, young activists across the country are leading local efforts to raise awareness and collect pledges from peers and the community to vow not to use the word ``retarded'' and recognize the first Wednesday of every March as a national awareness day for The Spread the Word to End the Word campaign.

Best Buddies and Special Olympics participants across the nation have enthusiastically taken the pledge to stop the derogatory use of the word ``retarded,'' and have collectively encouraged hundreds of thousands of others to do the same. I am proud to speak about this amazing group of young activists who are spreading hope each and every day; not just in their own communities but across the country and the world by making communities inclusive of people of all ability levels.

I am proud to have taken the pledge, and I thank all who also pledge to think of others before they speak and, in so doing, promote universal human dignity.

I thank the ranking member very much.

The Republican budget makes something very clear, and that is, Democrats and Republicans have very different visions for our great country. The Republican vision is harsh, and independent commentators have said a few things about their proposed budget. They've called it reverse Robin Hood. They've called it disturbing. And they've called it extreme. And I think one of the primary reasons is that the Republican budget breaks the promise that this country has made to generations of Americans that is Medicare.

The fundamental promise of Medicare is if you work hard and you play by the rules and you pay into Medicare every year, as you are working, that it will be there for you in retirement, and you can live your retirement years in dignity. Even in the face of a diagnosis of Alzheimer's or cancer, you will not go bankrupt, and your children will not go bankrupt.

Medicare makes America great. But unfortunately, through this budget, the Republicans say they don't share that view. Specifically, the Republican budget ends guaranteed coverage that our parents and grandparents have paid for, cuts Medicare benefits. It increases premiums and co-pays, and it scraps all of those important democratic cost saving reforms that strengthen Medicare.

I offered an amendment in the Budget Committee that would retain closing of the doughnut hole, the annual wellness visit, and other benefits, but unfortunately, it was voted down.

It ends Medicare as we know it and forces the average senior to pay twice as much for half the benefit.

Americans need to ask why. Why do they want to cut Medicare while at the same time protecting corporate tax subsidies and loopholes like the ones for Big Oil? Why do they want to cut Medicare while at the same time increasing tax breaks for millionaires?

The Republican budget proposes a harsh vision indeed, a vision that is contrary to our values for American families.

Let's get to the facts on women's health care under the Affordable Care Act, which is 2 years old this week.

First, good news: The Affordable Care Act outlaws discrimination based on gender in copayments and premiums for the same coverage. Women have generally been charged more for health insurance. A recent report shows that more than 90 percent of the best-selling health plans still charge women more than men for the same coverage. The Affordable Care Act ends that discrimination.

Second: Women can no longer be denied coverage by an HMO or health insurance company because they have a preexisting condition like breast cancer that's in remission, because they had a C-section when they delivered their child, or even because they had injuries from domestic violence.

Third: Women no longer have to jump through the bureaucratic hoop of obtaining permission to see their OB/GYN.

Fourth: Because prevention works and saves money, women in new health insurance plans will automatically be covered for screenings, mammograms, colonoscopies, and birth control.

Finally, health insurance companies can no longer cancel your policy if you get sick.

These are important consumer protections for women across America, for our mothers, for our daughters, and for our families.

Mr. Chair, in the aftermath of the BP Deepwater Horizon disaster, President Obama, lawmakers from both sides of the aisle, a national commission, businesses and environmentalists reached consensus that 80% of the fines and penalties that BP is required to pay for violating the Clean Water Act be devoted to Gulf of Mexico recovery and research. All have urged Congress to act, but unfortunately, the Congress has not done so.

As Co-Chair of the bipartisan Gulf Coast Caucus, I ask my colleagues not to let the effort languish any longer. The House should act expeditiously to do so and devote 80% of the Deepwater Horizon fines and penalties to the Gulf of Mexico.

Unfortunately, the Scalise amendment could be interpreted as an endorsement of a particular piece of legislation, such as the RESTORE Act. While the RESTORE Act does devote 80% of the Clean Water Act fines to the Gulf States, it is flawed in its current form and does not achieve meaningful recovery of the Gulf of Mexico.

So while I urge my colleagues to defeat the amendment, the time is now for the Congress to pass an 80% bill and focus on the economic and environmental health of the Gulf of Mexico.

Extensive review of the BP Deepwater Horizon disaster and the historic degradation of the Gulf of Mexico was conducted by the National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill, Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus Report, and the EPA Gulf Restoration

Task Force is appreciated. All recommended recovery and research strategies to be funded in large part by 80% of the fines and penalties under the Clean Water Act. Although the RESTORE Act purports to follow the recommended strategies, it does not and is flawed.

RESTORE should focus on a Gulf-wide research and recovery strategy

As currently drafted, the RESTORE Act does not promote a Gulf-wide research and recovery strategy. Under the formulas contained in the bill that divide the 80% resources, Gulf-wide research and recovery efforts would be disjointed and receive short-shrift. The formulas currently contained in the bill appear to be based upon Senate dynamics rather than a Gulf-wide recovery and research strategy based upon sound science. The RESTORE Act fails to make a large enough investment in Gulf-wide solutions to the ``dead zone,'' red tide outbreaks that threaten tourism, and the health of the Gulf overall. Where is the overarching science advisory component that is necessary for such an important research and recovery strategy?

This is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to address critical systemic issues that have plagued the Gulf for decades. We must not waste it.

RESTORE should devote greater resources to long term research and Gulf

monitoring

RESTORE should be improved to ensure that adequate Gulf research and monitoring are conducted for decades to come. Many of the impacts from the catastrophic disaster are currently impossible to discern to the naked eye and in the short-term. The blowout wreaked havoc on fisheries, marshes, seagrasses, oyster beds, coasts, and aquatic life. In addition, over past decades, science gathering and sharing in the Gulf has been neglected. While RESTORE does carve out some dollars for long-term research and monitoring, the investments are inadequate to ensure a long-term, sustained research and recovery effort.

Do not duplicate Natural Resource Damage Assessments $ Billions flowing

to impacted areas

Any legislation that devotes 80% of the Clean Water Act fines and penalties to the Gulf of Mexico research and recovery effort should not duplicate the billions of dollars going to the impacted areas under the Oil Pollution Act and the Natural Resource Damage Assessment. One billion dollars already have been directed to oiled areas and states for cleanup and restoration.

Jobs and Economics

The Gulf is rich in natural resources that support many jobs and economic stability for millions of families. The Gulf ecosystem produced thirty percent of the United States' gross domestic product in 2009. If our five Gulf States were one country it would rank seventh in global gross domestic product. Our abundance of natural resources is critical to our economic health, as those resources dwindle so do our livelihoods and our financial stability. Investing in long-term environmental restoration and addressing environmental issues present prior to the BP oil disaster is critical to achieving comprehensive economic restoration.

I am encouraged to see bipartisan support to direct 80% of the Clean Water Act fines to the Gulf of Mexico. However, the RESTORE Act as currently drafted falls far short of the coordinated, long-term, science-based effort that is needed to protect such a valuable national resource. Therefore, I look forward to working with all Members on an improved national strategy for the Gulf of Mexico and its communities.