Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, before I begin, I do want to wish everybody a happy St. Patrick's Day.

Mr. Speaker, on Monday, the House will meet at noon for morning hour and 2 p.m. for legislative business. Votes will be postponed until 6:30.

On Tuesday and Wednesday, the House will meet at 10 a.m. for morning hour and noon for legislative business.

On Thursday, the House will meet at 9 a.m. for legislative business. Mr. Speaker, late votes are likely in the House on Thursday, and Members are advised to adjust their schedules accordingly.

Mr. Speaker, the House will consider a number of suspensions next week, a complete list of which will be announced at close of business today.

In addition, the House will consider several critical pieces of the Republican plan to repeal and replace ObamaCare:

First, H.R. 372, the Competitive Health Insurance Reform Act, sponsored by Representative Paul Gosar, creates competition in the healthcare market by eliminating antitrust protection for insurance providers.

Next, H.R. 1101, the Small Business Health Fairness Act, sponsored by Representative Sam Johnson of Texas, allows small businesses to pool together and purchase plans, an important step toward purchasing health care across State lines.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, we will consider the FY 2017 reconciliation bill, also known as the American Health Care Act. This bill eliminates the many taxes and mandates of ObamaCare. It gives patients enhanced tools to take control of their healthcare decisions, and it expands choice so Americans are free to pick the plan that is best for themselves and their families.

Mr. Speaker, it is known that ObamaCare is failing, and we have a responsibility to provide Americans relief. These bills are the result of much deliberation and hard work, and their passage will help create a competitive marketplace that provides high-quality care at an affordable cost.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

And his question, based upon scheduling, and I know there were a lot of questions in there, so please let me work through and try to answer all of his questions.

The last question was in regard to the bill itself, and we are working through the process. It will be in the Rules Committee. As the legislative process works, there are always ways that you refine the bill, and I expect that there will be some elements that get refined inside the Rules Committee before it comes to the floor.

You had about five different questions there if I may follow all the way through. First, you talked about, and I was happy to hear--I wrote it down--you are glad to work to help to improve the bill--because when we were in the more than 26 hours of Energy and Commerce, the amendments the Democrats offered, we spent a couple of hours on just the one amendment about a hashtag of renaming the bill. So there is a change in attitude. I appreciate that from the other side of the aisle because we are always willing to work with you.

But you are not willing to help with it, then?

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding to me, and I ask if he would let me finish through.

It seems as though the gentleman has a little short- term memory of how they brought the Affordable Care Act and the CBO report when it came before us. It was not brought before us until it came right before the floor.

But let me follow through on all your questions because my response back was, I was actually excited to hear that Democrats wanted to work with us, that their attitude has changed from when we were in committee and they had amendments going forward, that it was no longer going to be hashtag amendments, it was actually going to be productive amendments; and I thank you for having that change of attitude.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud of the transparent process we have taken in the House, and I think this needs to be reminded to all the American public.

As I mentioned last week, our healthcare bill is the result of 113 hearings. I know the gentleman on the other side of the aisle, he is proud of the 72 hearings they had before they did the Affordable Care Act.

We have now marked up this bill in three separate committees, with over 18 hours of debate in Ways and Means, and over 27 hours of debate in Energy and Commerce, and the countless amendments from both Republicans and Democrats.

By the time we vote on the floor, this bill will have been publicly available online for 3 weeks. Now, it is only 127 pages. That is a far contrast to the 2,700-plus pages, if you want to compare it to ObamaCare.

So far, nearly 590,000 people have visited our website, and over 200,000 have downloaded this legislative text.

So, Mr. Speaker, that means more people have read our healthcare bill than went to Woodstock. I call that transparency. Republicans have been committed to repealing and replacing ObamaCare for years, and so now I think it is time to act.

The gentleman also commented about the CBO. Well, I am actually excited that you had another person who confirmed what the CBO said because what the CBO says about this bill is it will lower the deficit by $337 billion.

It will also reduce premiums by 10 percent by 2026, and it will secure major entitlement reform by capping Medicaid spending, giving States certainty and flexibility, saving taxpayers $880 billion, and making the program solvent for future generations, because that was a concern in one of the letters.

Now, Mr. Speaker, those are the facts. With regard to the coverage numbers, the CBO reports that most of that increase would stem from repealing the penalties associated with individual mandates. Let me repeat that. Most of the increase would stem from repealing the penalties associated with the individual mandate.

Now, that makes sense to me, because if we no longer force Americans to buy something they do not want, one-size-fits-all health care, they will naturally choose not to buy it.

But, Mr. Speaker, I know the gentleman across the other side of the aisle argues with me about the knowledge that everybody knows ObamaCare is failing. I would ask the gentleman to visit one-third of the counties in this country that only have one option.

Or why don't you go to Tennessee, where the President just was because, you know, 16 counties in Tennessee have no option. But ObamaCare will penalize you for not having health care when you can't even buy it.

But if ObamaCare was working so well, why do more people accept the penalty or the exemption than actually buy ObamaCare? That is a number that is quite interesting. That is why I am encouraged to see our plan will decrease the average premiums that people have been asking for.

Now, our goal is not just to sign up people for insurance. Our goal is to get America better health care.

Now, the gentleman also commented and had letters--and I love to read letters. I love to listen to constituents because that is what our work should be. And you read a letter when it came to Medicaid. And I would not scare people, I would actually talk to that individual.

Medicaid is on an unsustainable path. In one 10-year window, it will cost $1 trillion.

Mr. Speaker, the gentleman on the other side knows what $1 trillion is because that is about the entire amount we spend on discretionary spending. From all of the appropriations that we go through, that would take up everything we have.

Well, we know that is not sustainable, so we should do something about it. That is why we had a meeting with 18 Governors, Republicans and Democrats. And the number one thing they told us, give us flexibility to be able to manage. That is exactly what this bill does.

But I like to read some letters. Here is one from Colleen from Annapolis:

I just received the notice for my 2017 health insurance

policy. It will skyrocket, not by the advertised Maryland

State average of 20 to 25 percent but, rather, by 60 percent.

In addition, my deductible is going up 45 percent. Since the

inception of ObamaCare, my policy has increased 75 percent.

I am a 63-year-old female in excellent health who takes no

medication. My only benefit from the ACA has been two

mammograms, which I paid $12,600 in premiums to get. What a

disaster of a program.

I will be voting Republican this year, in the hope of

finally getting the ACA repealed. I just hope it happens

before my checkbook goes on life support.

Or the letter to the editor from Carl in Lusby, Maryland:

I can't afford my health insurance now under ObamaCare.

It's been a burden on our joint income, which is just above

the limit for qualifying for subsidies; and for 2017, I am

facing a 61 percent rate increase.

I'm faced with either paying a premium that will bankrupt

me and my wife, or paying the tax penalty at the end of the

year, which will also be unaffordable. And there are probably

several million Americans who are in the same boat as I am.

You know what, Carl? We listened to you. We listened, and now we are going to lead. We have moved a bill from the legislative process to the rules, what it says, for reconciliation. We have done hours of debate in three other committees. We will continue the process, as the rules say. We will go to the Rules Committee and then we will come to this floor. And for those who have written, change will come.

Yes, the Republican-appointed CBO Director and the Democratic CBO Director, as the gentleman, Mr. Speaker, from across the aisle says, agree that the premiums will go down, as so many Americans have asked for. We will put Medicaid on a sustainable path.

We will give Republican and Democrat Governors flexibility so they can manage their States in a better form. And most importantly, we will give America exactly what they asked for, the freedom to choose their own health care, the options of having more so they can direct what they want and desire, at the same time, having a lower cost.

So I welcome the gentleman for his questions. I know that wasn't about scheduling, but I think this is too important, because those 113 hearings we listened to the people before us, and we promised we would act, and we are keeping that promise as we move forward.

I ask the gentleman which bills he is referring to?

Those will be later in the month. Next week we will have two of those up that you referred to.

Yes. The committee has marked them up.

I think we both agree that responsible fiscal policy is important to our country's ability to succeed, and that includes honoring the full faith and credit of the United States. We expect to continue working closely with Secretary Mnuchin to ensure that America is on the right path to a strong fiscal future.

We know the amount of debt that has been added in the last 8 years has been tremendous. I know that the gentleman, when he looks to what we do next week--to be able to lower premiums, save more than $300 billion of the deficit, and let people have more choice--that is also a first step.

Now, I do not have any immediate action to announce, but we will relay any information to the Members as we move forward.

I thank the gentleman.

Is that going to be your last question?

Before I depart, though, I would like, Mr. Speaker, to wish my friend from the other side of the aisle a very happy St. Patrick's Day. I do apologize. I feel bad, when we look at the basketball round, what happened to Maryland; but if you look at NIT, Cal State Bakersfield is still on the march, so I have another team you can root for.

There will be no upsets.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that when the House adjourns today, it adjourn to meet on Monday, March 20, 2017, when it shall convene at noon for morning-hour debate and 2 p.m. for legislative business.

Mr. Speaker, I have a motion at the desk.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, on Monday, no votes are expected in the House. On Tuesday, the House will meet at noon for morning hour and 2 p.m. for legislative business. Votes will be postponed until 6:30. On Wednesday and Thursday, the House will meet at 10 a.m. for morning hour and noon for legislative business. On Friday, the House will meet at 9 a.m. for legislative business. Last votes of the week are expected no later than 3 p.m.

Mr. Speaker, the House will consider a number of suspensions next week, a complete list of which will be announced by close of business today.

In addition, the House will consider several important bills from the Veterans' Affairs Committee.

First, H.R. 1181, the Veterans Second Amendment Protection Act, sponsored by Chairman Phil Roe, which ensures that the Second Amendment rights of VA beneficiaries are not restricted without due process.

Next, H.R. 1259, the VA Accountability First Act, also sponsored by Chairman Roe, which grants the VA Secretary increased discretion to remove or suspend VA employees due to poor performance.

Finally, H.R. 1367, sponsored by Representative Brad Wenstrup, which enhances the VA's ability to recruit and retain highly qualified employees.

The failures of the VA are well-documented and completely unacceptable. These bills are a step in the right direction towards creating greater accountability at the VA, and keeping our promise to Americans' veterans who have sacrificed so much for us.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

I am pleased that we were able to pass the FY17 Defense Appropriations bill on a bipartisan basis this week. It is my hope that we can continue to pass the appropriation bills on a bipartisan basis as well.

As for future legislation, I would refer my friend to the Appropriations Committee, and, as always, I will keep Members posted of any scheduling updates.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

I have great trust in Chairman Frelinghuysen. I think you will continue to see that behavior.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

I always look forward to these discussions. I know they are about the schedule, but I always look forward to what quotes you are going to bring up next.

Let me see if I can answer all of those questions that you raised.

First, my friend did inform me, last week and again today, that the Democrats have held 79 hearings over 2 years on ObamaCare. Well, we have spent the last 6 years.

I promised you that I would see how many hearings we had. When I went back and checked, the Republicans have held 113 hearings on the ways to repeal and replace ObamaCare. We had expert witnesses on both sides of the aisle on everything from the individual mandate and Medicaid sustainability, to the medical device tax, and ObamaCare's failing co- ops.

We have been committed to repealing and replacing this law for years, and I am sure you will find a lot of quotes from almost everybody on this side of the aisle saying that same thing. We have done the work, we have listened to the American people, and we believe now it is time to act.

You did bring up about the committees. You brought up about reading the bill. So what we put forth is we put a website together for the patient-centered healthcare bill, and it is available online at readthebill.gop. Now, this is only 123 pages. That is a difference from your bill of 2,700 pages for ObamaCare.

Now, we remember what the Democrats said when they were passing ObamaCare, that you had to pass the bill to see what is in it. So I went back and checked how many people were unable to visit the website. We had over 350,000 visitors visit our website in just 36 hours, and 100,000 downloaded the legislative text.

Now, when you talk about dead of night, I was on this floor, you were on this floor, and I know people on both sides of the aisle have used it before, but the dilatory activity on the other side of the aisle to slow this process down put us into nighttime.

And then let's think about how this process went. It was an open process. Why did it go so long? We debated hours of Democrats' amendments because we weren't going to shut it down. We never called the question. We kept going as long as people wanted to go. And we spent hours on one amendment that just wanted to change it to a hashtag of a different name. That was a Democratic amendment to somehow change the bill. We didn't stop with that. We let everybody talk, and we let everybody have their voice because we believe in regular order.

Yes, we spent 27 hours on it because we were not going to deny anybody the ability to talk or offer their amendment. And that is exactly what we did, and that is what the American people expect to have happen.

So, 113 hearings, I congratulate you on your 79; 123 pages compared to 2,700. I believe this is a great first step in three phases. For too long this health care of ObamaCare has failed.

In that 2,700 pages they created 23 co-ops and provided more than $2 billion. In this short amount of time, 18 of them have collapsed. They had the quote that, if you like your health care, you could keep it, but millions of Americans found out that wasn't true. They said your premiums would go down. Millions of Americans have found out that is not true either.

Now, across this country, one-third of the entire country only has one provider. And the very sad part of this, just within the last month, Humana announced that they are going to pull out. That is leaving 16 counties, and I see my good friends from Tennessee, with no provider at all.

We can do so much better. That is why we spent the years; we spent the hearings; we have had the witnesses.

And I know it is your right to come and ask to adjourn so somehow we couldn't get to the bill, it is your right to continue to ask to adjourn so Members can't offer their amendments, but you know what? If we had to spend through the dead of night and stay up so we made sure, even if it is on the other side of the aisle, a Democrat could offer an amendment, just a hashtag to change the name, that is your right, and we would spend the time and do it. And we spent hours at it.

If you ask me, personally, I didn't think that amendment changed anybody's health care in America. But you have a right to do it, and we made sure we kept that right, and we had regular order.

I thank the gentleman for his quotes.

I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I appreciate the gentleman's comments.

Mr. Speaker, I do want to remind people, when you use reconciliation, what is the process? Well, the process states you have the authorizing committee post and they mark up. We did that. Budget Committee marks up. They will do that next week. Rules Committee will meet, then it comes to the House floor.

I will never apologize for having 113 hearings on repealing and replacing ObamaCare. I will never apologize for having all the witnesses in.

And I love that you bring a lot of quotes of people inside that are elected, but I will be very frank. The quotes I love and the quotes I care most about are the ones that come from my constituents.

For some reason, this idea that this is a complex issue but you had hearings before so you are going to forget all about those hearings, why do we have committees? Why do you keep Members on your own side of the aisle on the same committees? To build expertise, to solve big problems. So, no, they don't forget what they learned in those hearings.

But let me read you quotes from a few constituents.

``Dear Kevin, thank you for your diligence in these disruptive political times. I have several concerns.

``ObamaCare blew us out of the water. I retired early as an RN due to health problems, so I have to pay for my entire health insurance. I am not complaining about that, but I am tired of having premiums go through the roof. I lost my doctor and my plan.

``In 2017 there were few options without a $5,000 deductible. If I have to pay that much first, then why pay for insurance? Our income is not huge. We cannot afford this.''

Or from another constituent: ``Dear Kevin, I just wanted to convey that I strongly feel legislative action is needed to fix the ACA.

``My family deductible has increased over $3,000 a year--it used to be $1,000 8 years ago--and I practically only have health insurance in case a catastrophic accident were to occur.

``Also, my sister-in-law can no longer work more than 29 hours a week since her employer does not want to have to provide insurance. That is ridiculous.''

Or: ``Dear Kevin, I just got my 2017 health insurance renewal notice, $650 per month, up 20 percent. I am 60 years old, have worked and saved all my life, so I don't qualify for subsidies. I can't go without insurance, but I can't pay for it either. Something needs to be done. I am so upset that I am crying right now.''

But my friend, Mr. Speaker, on the other side of the aisle says to wait to help these people. Forget about the 113 hearings, even though it is more than the 70-some that ObamaCare had, or 123 pages is too much instead of 2,700.

I will never apologize for having the wisdom to listen and, now, the courage to lead. But I will promise you this, Mr. Speaker, and my friend on the other side of the aisle: I have never come to this floor to offer to adjourn just to disrupt the process.

And, yes, I had Members on our side of the aisle that would get frustrated that Democrats would offer an amendment that just dealt with a hashtag. No, let's let them have their say. If they feel that is important for American health care, to put a hashtag name change, then let's spend hours on it. Because we believe in the process, we will defend your right to have that process even though it will not help one constituent of mine or yours.

But you want to spend your time doing that? We will do that. And we did do that. That is why we worked through the night. But we will not give up on the American people. That is why we are doing what we are doing, and I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that when the House adjourns today, it adjourn to meet on Tuesday, March 14, 2017, when it shall convene at noon for morning-hour debate and 2 p.m. for legislative business.

Mr. Speaker, I have a motion at the desk.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, on Monday, no votes are expected in the House.

On Tuesday, the House will meet at noon for morning-hour and 2 p.m. for legislative business. Votes will be postponed until 6:30.

On Wednesday and Thursday, the House will meet at 10 a.m. for morning-hour and noon for legislative business.

On Friday, the House will meet at 9 a.m. for legislative business. Last votes of the week are expected no later than 3 p.m.

Mr. Speaker, the House will consider a number of suspensions next week, a complete list of which will be announced by close of business tomorrow.

In addition, the House will consider several reform bills straight from our Better Way agenda:

First, the Fairness in Class Action Litigation and Further Asbestos Claim Transparency Act, sponsored by Chairman Bob Goodlatte, which ensures that only similarly injured parties can be in the same class for purposes of a class action suit, as well as requires public disclosure of reports on the receipt and disposition of claims for injuries based on exposure to asbestos.

Next, H.R. 725, the Innocent Party Protection Act, sponsored by Representative Ken Buck, which establishes a uniform standard for determining whether a defendant has been fraudulently joined to a lawsuit.

And third, H.R. 720, the Lawsuit Abuse Reduction Act, sponsored by Chairman Lamar Smith, which restores accountability to our legal system by penalizing lawyers for filing baseless lawsuits.

Our Federal litigation system is plagued with broken rules that unnecessarily harm American businesses and consumers. With these measures, we will follow through on our pledge to take on trial lawyers and crack down on lawsuit abuse through meaningful litigation reform.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, the House will consider the Fiscal Year 2017 Department of Defense Appropriations bill, sponsored by Chairman Rodney Frelinghuysen.

Yes.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

We passed this bill last year, working together with others. You will see the bill reposted, and we will vote on it next week.

It will come straight to the floor.

This bill reflects the 2017 NDAA, which passed with 375 votes in the House and 92 votes in the Senate.

It is not the exact same, but it reflects the work of the NDAA. It is a bipartisan agreement. It is also--you will find as soon as it is posted to read all the way through it--a reflection of the 2017 NDAA bill.

That is very accurate. This is a bipartisan, bicameral agreement based upon the 2017 NDAA bill, which, if you watched, had 375 votes in the House, 92 in the Senate.

As you know as well as I do, and we have talked many times together about this, we cannot continue to have our military continue further with just the CR. If you have a continuing resolution, you now are saying that you have to fund what was last year. You can't go through with what the future needs without putting together the appropriations process. And this is what we are going through right now.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

The gentleman knows we are working, in part, under the continuing resolution short-term; but it is my intention, once we pass the FY 2017 defense bill, I will keep Members updated on the further floor schedule of appropriations bills. It would be my goal to continue to pass the rest of the appropriations bills.

I thank the gentleman for yielding. I always look forward to your quotes.

Now you have gone beyond. You now bring in rumors. I give you credit there. You have been here quite some time, much longer than I. I agree with you, this is a very big issue. That is why, for the last 6 years, we have had hearings because all those hearings you reported, I would have wished you would have listened during those hearings. I would have wished you would have been able to do a healthcare bill that actually works. The essence of what the ACA did, it was about exchanges and the expansion of Medicaid.

So my dear friend here tells me that was a big success. What do you tell all those people across this country? In fact, one-third of every county in this country now only has one health insurer. Humana just announced they are pulling out. Because you love quotes so much, let me read what the CEO of Aetna says: ObamaCare is failing. It has entered a ``death spiral.''

With Humana pulling out, that gives 16 counties in Tennessee that have no one to care for them. The expansion of Medicaid--I know you are concerned about the budget, as am I--says within this 10-year window, in the tenth year, it will cost us $1 trillion. You know as well as I do that that is about the exact amount of money we spend for all discretionary spending in government today. We watched the ACA create 23 CO-OPs. They were provided more than $2 billion. Eighteen of those 23 have collapsed.

So, yes, for the last 6 years, we have been holding hearings, we have been listening to the public, and we have been working on this bill. Yes, we will go regular order. We will have a markup in committee. When the bill comes out of committee, we will take that markup, we will go to the Committee on the Budget because it is reconciliation, and we will bring that bill to the floor, just as the rules state we will do that. We have waited 6 years to do this, just as we moved one last year to the President as well, and he vetoed it.

We cannot sit and wait for this failure to continue any longer. The health of this country deserves something much better. That is why we have been spending our time, that is why we have been working on it, and that is why we have been listening. We have had the wisdom to listen, but now I promise you we will have the courage to lead.

Well, I would only like to end with this: I was here at the same time. I know you have your history, and I have the history that I remember. I remember seeing the Speaker at that time, now your leader, say we need to pass the bill to find out what is in it. I remember being here late that night. I remember a lot of people, citizens around this building complaining. You know what? The saddest part of all that, their fears became true. They didn't get to keep the doctor or the health plan that they were promised. The premiums they were told would go down $2,500, that didn't happen. They now find that they don't have the care that they were promised. We have spent our time.

You did make a statement that there are a lot of new people in this building. I would argue that is a reason why there are a lot of new people in this building, the ACA and the way you carried it out. That is why we did not do that. You stipulated a little earlier, trying to state about a 3-day rule. That wasn't your rule. That is a rule we instituted and changed when we became the majority, Mr. Speaker.

So we will have regular order. We will have regular order. We will take it through committee, we will have it open for debate, and we will bring it to the floor because we promised the American people, and we will keep our promise, just as the President, as you heard just this week, talked about the reform. We will protect preexisting conditions. We will make sure those who are 26 or younger can stay on their parents' plan. The bans or lifetime limits, we will protect those like we have always said we would. We will create a healthcare bill that actually empowers the individual, not more government. We will actually lower the premiums. That is the difference between us. We can have those debates, and I welcome them, because I think history will show your hearings and our hearings. But, at the end of the day, I want the history to show who actually did a better job of providing health care to the American people at a lower cost.

You are not on that committee, so you can look at it when we mark it up.

No.

If the gentleman yields, I will answer his question.

It is similar to every other bill we move. They will post it before they mark it up so everybody can see it and debate it.

Have you seen a scheduled markup? I didn't have it in my list. I don't announce markups, but apparently this is another rumor you may have heard.

I thank the gentleman for asking. That is a question to the chairman. I simply provide you the schedule for next week.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

That is an action of the committees, and they will list as soon as they are prepared to do their markups.

Will the gentleman yield for one moment?

The gentleman understands that this is coming through reconciliation, and reconciliation is created through committee, not by submitting a bill. So this is regular order.

I thank the gentleman for his concern, and I thank the gentleman for the last 6 years that we have had concerns about this. I will provide the gentleman with a number of hearings. In Energy and Commerce this year alone, they have had hearings and they have had votes on markups on improvements and changes to our healthcare system. If the gentleman would like, I will provide those to him at a later date.

But when it comes to reconciliation, committees will move that. When it goes through the committees, it will then go to the Budget Committee, and then it will come to the floor. That is regular order, and that is what we are following.

I expect to follow regular order. When a bill goes through Energy and Commerce and a bill comes through Ways and Means, it will then go for markup inside the Budget Committee, and then come to the floor.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

I just didn't know that 4 months later we were still going to litigate who won the election. It has always been the electoral college.

I know the gentleman likes to make a lot of quotes, but I think if you take my quote and you look at the date and you want to go back in time and you look at the polling, I think my quote is right. I think the American people were at that exact same position.

You talk about consequences. The ACA has a tremendous amount of consequences on the American public, and, unfortunately, they haven't been positive. Some have, but the majority have not. That is why a number of people today, one-third of this Nation of the counties, 1,022, only have one healthcare provider.

I listened to our President just this week right down this well. I know you haven't commented about that or quoted anything he said there, but I listened to other people who commented about that, people who are on different sides of the aisle who I know did not vote for him.

Mr. Speaker, Van Jones, I know the man well. He and I philosophically disagree. But he said that night, listening to President Trump, that he became America's President.

So I just say to my friend across the aisle, Mr. Speaker, that I think 4 months is long enough to decide who won the race, and we don't have to come back to this. If we really want this country to come together, I don't think that type of questioning on this floor is productive. I think it is time to come together as one Nation and start solving these problems, but not try to bring back up and litigate who really won the election.

Mr. Speaker, if I could just tell my friend, when I refer to a poll, I mean the main poll of election day. If I look at what happened on 2010 and I look at what took place in this last election, you are correct, one side campaigned on repealing and replacing ObamaCare. This is only the third time since World War II that the American public entrusted that to a Republican Party who have a majority in the House, a majority in the Senate, and the Presidency.

So, yes, that is the poll I was looking at; the same as what transpired in 2010. That was the cornerstone and the foundation of what people said in that last election.

We are moving forward on that our promise. We have been working on this for more than 6 years with hearings, townhalls, and listening. We are going through reconciliation, the regular order. So the committees will mark up, send it in to the Committee on Budget, where they will do a markup, and then it will come to the floor.

I thank the gentleman for his concern.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Yes, Mr. Speaker, we did meet with a bipartisan group of Governors, and that was one of the discussions as well. It is not scheduled at this time, but we will continue to work on that in committee. Our hope is to be able to find a solution in committee and be able to move that forward.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

This is a matter for investigation by the House Intelligence Committee. For years, we have investigated Putin's hostile international actions.

Just so the gentleman does know, Mr. Speaker, this week, Chairman Nunes and Ranking Member Schiff approved the scope of their committee's inquiry into Russia's measures of targeting in the 2016 election. I support this bipartisan investigation. I have great faith that the committee will fully investigate all of the evidence and follow the facts wherever they lead.

I know the gentleman, Mr. Speaker, made comments in regards to the attorney general. Attorney General Sessions stated this morning that whenever it is appropriate, he will recuse himself. I agree with those remarks.

As far as the ongoing investigation into Russia, I would, again, direct my friend to the bipartisan effort that is underway in the House Intelligence Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that when the House adjourns today, it adjourn to meet at 4 p.m. on Monday, March 6, 2017.

Mr. Speaker, I move that the message of the President be referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union and ordered printed.

Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

The motion was agreed to; accordingly (at 10 o'clock and 17 minutes p.m.), under its previous order, the House adjourned until tomorrow, Wednesday, March 1, 2017, at 10 a.m., for morning-hour debate.

Mr. Speaker, I have a motion at the desk.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentlewoman from Wyoming for her hard work on this bill and bringing it here today. Most people don't realize just how much land the Federal Government controls, and it is just a fact that someone thousands of miles away in an office in D.C. won't understand those land issues as much as the people who live on the land do.

Now, the sponsor of this bill, Ms. Cheney, knows that in her great State of Wyoming, they constantly struggle with the Federal Government over land policies, just as California and many Western States do. Federal regulators restrict how we can build, what our farmers can grow, where our ranchers can graze, and how our people can enjoy the beauty of our land.

The Bureau of Land Management's new rule, the innocently named Planning 2.0 rule, imposes Washington's vision on land management over vast areas of the West. This was devised by people who don't live on our land and who don't know our land, and they just try to dictate how to use our land. They are undermining the very idea of multiple use of Federal lands by making the lands entirely off limits for any type of economic purposes.

Under this rule, the Bureau will cut out local and county officials even more. They will consolidate control over 175 million acres of land in 11 States out West, and that is not a small amount of land. Just to put that in perspective, that is over 261 times the size of Rhode Island.

Using the Congressional Review Act today, we will be able to overturn this last-minute power grab from the Obama administration and bring some power back to the people. The American people should have the power back again to write their own future.

I want to thank Congresswoman Cheney for keeping her word and for standing with Wyoming and all those out west who care for their land and want those locals to be able to control and to understand where it is best to graze, to care, and to build, not somebody in Washington to dictate what to do with it.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, on Monday, the House will meet at noon for morning-hour and 2 p.m. for legislative business. Votes will be postponed until 6:30 p.m.

On Tuesday, the House will meet at 10 a.m. for morning-hour and noon for legislative business. Last votes of the week are expected during the evening hours on Tuesday.

Mr. Speaker, the House will consider a number of suspensions next week, a complete list of which will be announced by close of business today.

Mr. Speaker, the House will also continue our work under the Congressional Review Act to undo onerous Obama administration regulations through three more joint resolutions. The first, sponsored by Representative Brett Guthrie, will stop a rule that significantly expands the Federal Government's involvement in teacher education.

Without our action this could result in fewer teachers serving some of our

Nation's most vulnerable children, and it could make it harder for schools to recruit the best teachers. That is the exact opposite of what Americans want for their children.

The second, sponsored by Representative Todd Rokita, would address how the accountability provisions of the Every Student Succeeds Act are being implemented. This bipartisan law empowered States to hold schools accountable, but somehow, when the regulation came out, there was an expanded Federal role. This was not what Congress intended nor what is best for our students.

And the third, Mr. Speaker, sponsored by Representative Liz Cheney, addresses how the Department of the Interior regulates resource management plans. These plans guide how BLM manages all Federal lands. But the rule only addresses how BLM must deal with the public, as well as State and tribal governments. We are rightfully concerned that there is no process or procedure for local governments in these new rules.

Finally, my friend may notice that a familiar face is not sitting next to me today, but Ben Howard is up in the gallery today. After serving 8 years on Capitol Hill, the last 6 in my office, our friend Ben has left the job. He is now working in the White House Office of Legislative Affairs.

Ben was one of the first people we hired when I was elected majority whip. It was here that most people around the Hill got to know Ben through his always witty floor updates and always constant Penn State football commentary. When I was elected majority leader, I asked Ben to be the floor director, a position in which he has served well for the past 2-plus years.

My friend would be happy to know that Ben is from Maryland. He was born and raised and currently resides in Olney with his wife, Amy, and their two young sons, John and Daniel.

So on behalf of myself, our entire team, and the entire Republican Conference, I want to thank Ben for his years of service and for his hard work, and wish him many years of happiness.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

I am not sure if, in the beginning of your question, you want us to speed up or slow down, but I thank the gentleman for the question.

I heard your question. Your question asked it both ways.

Regardless of who won the election, the simple fact is ObamaCare is a failure. Regardless of who won the election, we would both be sitting here today having the same conversation about what we would replace it with.

Let's just simply talk about the facts.

There were 23 co-ops created in ObamaCare. They were given $2 billion. As of today, 18 of them have failed. There are roughly a little more than 3,000 counties in America; 1,022 of those counties, roughly one-third, now only have one insurance company. Five States only have one insurance company, thanks to ObamaCare.

All of America knows the old quotes: if you like your health plan, you can keep it--we know that is no longer true--or if you like your doctor, you can keep it--that is no longer true.

When the President said that our premiums would go down by $2,500, now we know that is not true. So, yes, we would have this discussion regardless of who won this election. ObamaCare has failed.

So, yes, we are going to work together, just as, after the last election, I put a letter out to every Governor, Republican or Democrat, every insurance commissioner, Republican or Democrat, to provide us with their ideas. We welcome every idea on the other side of the aisle, too, because we will do this differently. We welcome your ideas as well.

If you noticed in the Energy and Commerce Committee, they have the hearing schedule. We will begin, and it will be an open process. We welcome your participation because we want a system that works, we do not want a system that has failed, and I believe we have the ideas to make it work correctly.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Since ObamaCare has passed and now that we know what was in it, you would know that there are 1,400 pages in there that give a great deal, amount of power to the Secretary of Health and Human Services. Unfortunately, today, that Secretary has not been confirmed.

That Secretary has not been confirmed simply because of politics. It is not on my side of the aisle. It is on the Democrats' side of the aisle over in the Senate.

Do you know how far they have gone? How much do they really want to work on health care when you actually said it needed to be reformed? They wouldn't even show up in committee. So how much do they really care about Americans? They don't even show up in committee to ask the questions. They wanted to run and hide. So how much do they really want to work?

If we want to go quote by quote, when we go back to what President Obama said when the premiums were going to lower by $2,500, what do we say to Arizona when they went up 116 percent or to Tennessee by 63 percent and then three-quarters of Tennessee counties only have one provider or to Minnesota by 59 percent or to Oklahoma by 59 percent or to Alabama, 58, or to Pennsylvania, 53, or to Nebraska, 51?

Can we stop this rhetoric, and can we now get to work? Because I will tell you this: next month is when we begin because I am hopeful that we will no longer put up with the political games on the Senate side and that we will confirm the new Secretary because you have to have a Secretary in place if you want to reform ObamaCare, because you gave so much power to the Secretary. We all know that. So let's work together on behalf of the American people and end this pain.

I will tell you this: the unfortunate reality, in today's system, is that coverage does not always mean care. The deductibles are so high that many people don't even go to their doctors. I can tell you that in States, prior to ObamaCare, their high-risk pools were cheaper then for their care than now in just buying ObamaCare. We all know it is a failure. So let's stop playing the political games, and let's put the people before politics, and let's put a system in that works. Our door is open, and the committee is open for all ideas. Let's work together to solve it.

Yes, you do.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

I listened to the Speaker when he took office, too, and he also said ``regular order.'' In the schedule for next week, it is not on the list.

The executive order signed by the President, really, as you know, is based on legislation that passed this House with overwhelming bipartisan support. It was following the attacks over the past 2 years. It was the SAFE Act that passed this House 289-137, and the Visa Waiver Program Improvement and Terrorist Travel Prevention Act that passed by 407-19. I will point out that these two bills received veto-proof majorities, and President Obama signed the visa waiver bill into law.

President Trump's actions are temporary pauses and reassess our vetting procedures to keep our country safe. While there was, certainly, some confusion with how this was implemented over the weekend, the Secretary of Homeland Security is effectively addressing key issues to ensure legal permanent residents who are returning to our country are allowed entry unless our security services have a compelling reason to suggest otherwise. America remains a place of refuge for those seeking peace, freedom, and opportunity across the world.

Now, my friend knows, because we have been in meetings this week, that our rhetoric matters. Other people listen to what we say. In these types of situations, especially with a new administration, I have always told my children: at any time in a situation, let's take a deep breath; let's not lose our heads. Especially with a brand new administration, I try to give them the benefit of the doubt. They don't have their Cabinet there yet. Let's let them get their footing. It is not a ban--it is a pause. It is based upon two pieces of legislation that passed this House.

You love to quote people; so if I may:

``House Democrats and House Republicans have no greater priority than keeping Americans safe. This is neither a partisan issue nor is it a partisan difference. Many Americans are frustrated with the pace of progress against ISIS in Iraq and Syria. I want to see the administration and Congress working together to protect our Nation. The reforms in this bill are an excellent start.

``This legislation will make it easier for law enforcement to vet those visitors who are coming from Visa Waiver countries, such as in Europe, to ensure that we are not admitting those who have traveled to places like Iraq and Syria and link up with ISIS.''

That was said by you.

So you know the importance.

What I would say to the gentleman is: let's work with this administration.

As we sat in our meeting this week with leaders of other countries, I thought their advice to us was good advice: let's not say what this is not, because we may get political points with one another, but it puts them in harm's way, and they know what the truth of this is.

I think you and I agree on a lot of different things, and we are cordial with one another when we disagree, and I think this is an area in which sometimes we may disagree, but sometimes we have shown we could agree.

I know you want to keep America safe, and I know we want to keep America safe.

I also know it is a brand new administration. I also know that when I go down to that White House--you have been there with me--there is not a lot of staff there. I know there are going to be a few hiccups along the way. I am going to work with them. I am going to help them, and I want you to help us help them as well.

My kids don't tweet.

Mr. Speaker, President Obama said that he was rooting for President Trump's success.

I would also give the advice, let's not root against him. He still doesn't have his own Cabinet. When I watched and listened to what some on the other side of their own leadership say about some there, I could see where the rhetoric continues to rise. I think we should put that down. The election is over, and now is the time to govern.

There are big problems out there. We can score as many political points as we want back and forth, but there are challenges. You and I have worked together on so many issues out here, from opioids, from the visa waiver so many different times. And we have disagreed others times.

I think it would behoove us and the American public that we can show the leadership to do that, and I look forward to working with you on these issues.

Mr. Speaker, it is good to have these colloquies back.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that when the House adjourns today, it adjourn to meet on Monday, February 6, 2017, when it shall convene at noon for morning-hour debate and 2 p.m. for legislative business.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in favor of the rule and the underlying legislation.

Since the beginning of this Congress, we have devoted ourselves most prominently to a single goal: making Washington work for the people again.

There is one thing here in Washington that consistently stands against our people, our economy, and our Constitution: the Federal bureaucracy.

These agencies, bureaus, and departments--so numerous that nobody even knows how many there are--spend their lives thinking up new rules, and the rules they produce weigh down businesses, destroy jobs, and limit Americans' rights. Career bureaucrats who can't be voted out of office wield punishing authority with little to no accountability. They are agents of the status quo, and the revolving door of Federal employees moving to lobbying arms and consulting firms breed thousands of regulations that enrich the connected and powerful, sometimes at the great expense of the average American. This is the swamp. This is what opposes the people, and we are draining it.

In recent weeks, this House has already started its two-part plan to strip the bureaucracy of its power. We started to change the structure in Washington by passing the REINS Act and the Regulatory Accountability Act. This week, we begin part two: targeting specific rules and stripping them from the books.

There has been no industry in America that has been more regulated than energy. We are going to use the Congressional Review Act to repeal the stream protection rule that could destroy tens of thousands of mining jobs and put up to 64 percent of our country's coal reserves off limits.

Then we will take on President Obama's 11th hour BLM methane emissions requirement. The oil and gas industry in America has already drastically reduced methane emissions even while increasing output, and the EPA already has the authority to regulate air emissions. Instead of helping the environment, this rule could cost America's energy industry up to $1 billion by 2025 and force smaller operations, especially out West, to shut down and lay off employees. So, this Friday, the House will get rid of it.

We will also take the ax to the SEC disclosure rule, which--now, if you can believe it--targets publicly traded American energy companies with even more regulatory compliance while it lets foreign companies off the hook. Washington should put American companies first, not put them at a disadvantage to their foreign competitors.

Mr. Speaker, it is not just energy, which would be bad enough; but under President Obama, the bureaucracy has even threatened our basic constitutional rights. A new rule from the Social Security Administration would increase scrutiny on up to 4.2 million disabled Americans if they attempt to purchase firearms. For the completely unrelated circumstance of having someone help manage your finances, Social Security recipients could be kept from exercising their Second Amendment rights. In an affront to due process, the bureaucracy has even attempted to blacklist from Federal contracts any business that is accused of violating labor laws, and that could be before the company has a chance to defend itself in court.

Every single one of these will be gone. With a vote in the House, a vote in the Senate, and President Trump's signature, we will get rid of every one of these job-killing and destructive regulations. The House is always at the service of the people. Now we are making the bureaucracy serve the people, too.