Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak in favor of H.R. 2009, the Keep the IRS Off Your Health Care Act. ObamaCare has proven to be a terrible law that will continue to hurt individuals, employers, and our health care system.

While accurate information regarding the law has been scarce, what we know for sure is that premiums are skyrocketing, American families are confused, and doctors and nurses are afraid they will not be able to continue to care for their patients.

Businesses across the country are being forced to not only adhere to the onerous paperwork requirements, but have been in a holding pattern for over 3 years waiting for implementation. Recently, we learned that the IRS has been targeting different groups and singling them out for intense scrutiny based on their political views. But as ObamaCare is set to be implemented, Americans are expected to trust the IRS with the responsibility of implementing this destructive law. This has proven to be unworkable and a dangerous path for our health care system and our country to be on.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to discuss the upcoming implementation of ObamaCare.

Prior to coming to Washington, I was a nurse for over 21 years, and I'm passionate about health care. My husband is a general surgeon, and he continues to practice in our hometown of Dunn, North Carolina. I'm very, very proud of that.

A couple of years ago when the President was proposing his legislation to basically overhaul health care in America, my husband and I became very active speaking out. That was well before ever considering running for Congress. As a result, because of our passion and concern for this country and health care as a whole, I found myself winning my election and here fighting this fight. We continue with this fight, and we are 98 days away from the open enrollment process going into effect for ObamaCare. This is something that the American people have been sitting back and watching for quite some time, and there are many, many questions that remain to be answered.

Mr. Speaker, a recent GAO study shined some light on some areas that we've been asking questions about for a very long period of time. Serving on the Energy and Commerce Committee, the Energy and Commerce Committee put forward a request to the GAO to find out where exactly are we in the implementation of ObamaCare, this takeover of America's health care affecting one-sixth of our economy and affecting jobs across this country. It's the number one reason today, Mr. Speaker, that employers are not hiring, because they're not sure of the effects that this will have once fully implemented.

There again, this week, the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office put forward their findings. I just want to highlight some of those for you:

States have yet to complete 85 percent of the required program activities. That means essentially, Mr. Speaker, that only 15 percent of what needs to be in place at the State level for ObamaCare is actually in place. Core functions of both Federal- and State-based exchanges have yet to be completed with less than 4 months before open enrollment, any other missed deadline threats, and timely establishment of exchanges. Exchanges are not in place, exchanges are not ready to be implemented, and yet we continue on this timeline path.

HHS has not yet completed the critical steps needed to determine eligibility for credits and cost-sharing subsidies. There's much groundwork that still needs to be laid and implementation figured out, and we don't even have those answers from HHS.

Key data-sharing agreements between the Federal exchange and its Federal and State counterparts are not complete.

Consumer assistance and outreach activities to individuals and employers have yet to be implemented and have been delayed.

It cannot simply be a political campaign on the road touting the virtues of ObamaCare that will implement this program. This is a major, major concern for all of us who know how important health care is.

I can go on. There are many more pieces to the GAO report, which basically cites the fact that CMS is not ready. CMS is supposed to come in and help the States that haven't implemented yet or aren't ready. Where are they? They're not there. They're not acting. We have these questions, but who does this affect? What are the questions that need to be answered?

This afternoon, I had the opportunity to go to National Children's Hospital and meet with some of the families there, very ill children, children dealing with diabetes, cancer. I got the opportunity to see a 1-year-old who's waiting for a heart transplant. These are the children that will be affected by the implementation of ObamaCare. Why? Because research will be affected, because lifesaving cures and treatments will be affected.

How can we implement a health care system that no one at this point can actually state will improve the quality of care of our health care system? It's very important that when we talk about health care and the takeover of health care that we separate the two issues: one, health care pay-for, health care insurance, health care coverage; and then health care itself. They both suffer as a result of ObamaCare being implemented.

We simply cannot stand by and allow this to happen. My colleague from Kentucky, he is here this evening as well, and he has some words. I yield some of our time to the gentleman from Kentucky.

Mr. Speaker, continuing with our discussion about the implementation of ObamaCare, I think it's important, as my colleague from Kentucky has cited, that back home, in his district, many businesses, many individuals, many families are being negatively affected as this moves towards implementation.

Tomorrow, in the Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, we will be holding a hearing that actually discusses the challenges facing our American businesses. Back in my district and actually testifying here tomorrow is one of my constituents, Mr. Steve Lozinsky, who will be here with his wife, Kathy. They actually own a business, Sparkle & Shine Cleaning Service. It's a family-owned business, and it's based in Apex, North Carolina. Sparkle & Shine was started in 1998 with one employee, and, today, it has over 240 employees.

Put simply, Sparkle & Shine cannot afford the $2,000 per employee fine attached to ObamaCare. My friend, my constituent, back home cannot provide the health care coverage. He employs low-income workers. They are entry-level jobs. They are hard workers. Many of these individuals actually served time in jail and are now on a second chance at life. Mr. Lozinsky and his wife, Kathy, have given these individuals a second chance, and now their jobs are in jeopardy because of this devastating health care law.

To my colleague again from Kentucky, I'm sure that he also has many, many stories to share.

Just to follow up on some of the remarks that my colleague has made, in getting back to the issue of jobs and job creation, there was a recent Gallup Poll out this week that found that 41 percent of small businesses have stopped hiring because of ObamaCare. That is a staggering number. Then to the point of good patient-centered health care, that is not what ObamaCare will provide. In fact, the CBO has estimated that 31 million in 10 years will still remain uninsured.

So what are we doing? Why are we creating this system that will be broken from the start and on which we will only spend hard-earned taxpayer dollars trying to fix and plenty of time? Who will go without the good patient-centered health care that every American deserves?

I was at home, watching the TV, ready to put my foot through it.

That's a wonderful question.

I have another constituent who has shared numerous times with me his concern for the implementation of ObamaCare.

Jerol and Telia Kivett, from Clinton, North Carolina, owned, again, a family-

owned business that was started by his father back in the fifties. This company makes church furniture--church pews for synagogues, funeral homes, churches. Jerol and his wife are so concerned about this mandate and are wanting and needing to avoid this government mandate that it makes it extremely expensive for him to do business. He at one point had 160 employees. He is now down to about 45 employees.

As you can imagine, in order for him to continue to do his business in the way that he sees fit, in the way that was started by his father, how will he continue into the future doing business when he knows that working his way back up again in this awful Obama economy--for him to hit that 50th employee--will mean a penalty for him if he is not providing health care coverage for his employees? If he is able to provide that health care coverage, it will be devastatingly expensive.

With that, I would like to welcome my colleague from Texas, Congressman Burgess, for a few comments as well for he is well-versed in health care and in, again, the devastation that ObamaCare will bring.

Thank you to my colleague from Texas. His insight on this very important issue is vital to coming up with the solutions that we need.

I do want to touch on one of the points that you were making, Dr. Burgess. Basically, I saw a report this morning put out by the Republican Study Committee that basically said that there was a study that is showing that we will have a shortage of 30,000 doctors within this country in 2 years. That is devastating.

Thank you to the gentleman.

I do want to take a moment to talk about another group of young individuals in this country, young Americans who are also being negatively affected as a result of the implementation of ObamaCare: our students who are paying back student loans.

As we all know, July 1 student interest rates are scheduled to double, essentially. My staff and I have done some research on this. And if you all remember back in 2009, when President Obama was implementing the health care bill, they also took over the student loans in this country. That was for pay-for. And according to the Congressional Budget Office, over the next 10 years, $8.7 billion of that student loan payback will come from those student loans.

Not only are we affecting health care in this country, but we are also affecting our young people, those individuals who are graduating from colleges around this country who may or may not have a job to go to, a job that they have prepared a career for; and yet they too will be paying for ObamaCare.

With that, I would just say that the good news for the House is that last month we passed the Smarter Solutions for Students Act, and now it lies with the Senate for passage as well.

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

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

The motion was agreed to; accordingly (at 9 o'clock and 20 minutes p.m.), under its previous order, the House adjourned until tomorrow, Wednesday, June 26, 2013, at 10 a.m. for morning-hour debate.

Madam Speaker, I thank my esteemed colleague for handling the time here on the floor in this very important issue.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 1797, an important bill that will protect women and unborn children. This legislation is supported by reliable scientific research that shows that an unborn child at 20 weeks' gestation can feel pain. Coupled with the now-known dangerous acts of an abortionist like Kermit Gosnell, it is clear that Congress must act.

We can all agree that a woman facing an unexpected pregnancy can be in a crisis situation, not knowing what she should do or what choices she can make. That is why it is vital to put into place protections for women and ensure that people like Kermit Gosnell can never harm again.

We have a duty to protect American women and the unborn children of this country from harm. I urge my colleagues to vote for this important bill and support H.R. 1797.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the service and sacrifice of Specialist Daniel Lucas Elliot.

On July 15, 2011, Specialist Elliott's vehicle was in the lead vehicle of a convoy performing an improvised explosive device patrol in Basra, Iraq. Specialist Elliot's vehicle struck an improvised explosive device, killing him instantly. Specialist Elliott is survived by his parents, Ed A. and Martha P. Elliott of Youngsville, North Carolina, and his wife Trisha H. Elliott of Raleigh, North Carolina.

Specialist Elliott was born on July 18, 1989 in Youngsville, NC. He entered the United States Army Reserve on January 10, 2007. Specialist Elliott attended Basic Training and Advanced Individual Training at Fort Leonardwood, MO where he was awarded the Military Occupational Specialty of Military Police.

In January 2009, Specialist Elliott deployed with the 810th Military Police Company to Baghdad, Iraq, in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom. Later that year he moved to Basra, Iraq, where he served the rest of his deployment.

In March 2011, Specialist Elliott volunteered to deploy to Iraq a second time with the 805th Military Police Company in support of Operation New Dawn. He found himself stationed in Basra, Iraq, with the 3rd Brigade Combat Team, 1st Calvary Division. It was during this assignment that he gave his life for his fellow soldiers.

Specialist Elliott's awards and decorations include the Bronze Star Medal (posthumous), Purple Heart Medal (posthumous), Meritorious Service Medal (posthumous), Army Commendation Medal, Army Good Conduct Medal, Army Reserve Component Achievement Medal, National Defense Service Medal, Army Service Ribbon, Overseas Service Ribbon, Iraqi Campaign Medal and the Global War on Terrorism Service Medal.

On June 8, 2013, the Army Reserve will dedicate the Cary, North Carolina, US Army Reserve Center to the memory of Specialist Elliot and his sacrifice for our country. The ``Specialist Daniel Lucas Elliot Army Reserve Center'' will serve as a reminder to the community, the nation, and our army of the courage and sacrifice of our Soldiers as they provide us security and defend our way of life.

Mr,Speaker, I ask that you please join me, and the United States Army Reserve, in recognizing Specialist Elliot's dedicated service to the Army and our Nation. His performance and selfless service are in keeping with the highest traditions of military service and reflect great credit upon himself, the United States Army Reserve, and the United States Army.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 1911, the Smarter Solutions for Students Act.

Ever since 2006, student loan interest rates have been set by Congress through legislation. As I'm sure all of us remember, about 1 year ago we were affected by the artificially low interest rates that were ready to expire. But instead of finding a viable solution, Congress temporarily extended the rates and put off a permanent decision for another year.

Now, here we are again. And if we do nothing, we will be here in the same exact place again with the fight again at the expense of our college students. Congress should not be in the business of setting interest rates, and H.R. 1911 fixes this problem and prevents Congress from playing political games with our young Americans' future.

The college experience has always been a large part of the American Dream. We want the best for our children. We want them to have the opportunity to pursue a college education and create a better life for themselves. We owe it to our younger generation. We owe it to those high school seniors. And I believe that this bill will take care of that issue.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Terry Sanford High School of Fayetteville, NC as they celebrate their centennial graduation on June 6, 2013.

Recognized by US News and World Report for receiving the Silver Medal in the annual list of America's Best High Schools in 2006, as well as being ranked one of the top 25 high schools in North Carolina this year, Terry Sanford is a shining example of a school preparing our students for the challenges of the 21st Century.

Terry Sanford offers fourteen different Advanced Placement courses as well as a variety of honors courses. In addition, Terry Sanford is home to the School of Global Studies which offers a rigorous, liberal arts college preparatory education in order to promote academic excellence, global awareness, and cultural and social growth.

I would like to congratulate Terry Sanford High School and its staff for 100 years of excellence and I commend them for their outstanding service in North Carolina education.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman and the committee for all the hard work that you've done, and especially to my good friend and fellow Republican Women's Policy Committee member, Representative Martha Roby, who introduced this very important bill because she realizes that as a mother of two children that the workplace must change to adapt to our increasingly stressful lives.

Americans are struggling to balance their lives, doing everything they can to maintain their careers while still spending time with their families. We in the Congress can help. If H.R. 1406 becomes law, a working mom and dad can choose to use the time and a half overtime he or she earns as actual paid time off instead of cash. They would be able to use this time to see their daughter's piano recital or their son's baseball game when they would otherwise have to be at work.

But, of course, even with this commonsense piece of legislation, there are detractors. Many myths have been spread about this bill. You've heard them here today. And the opponents refer to it as a ``pay cut for working moms,'' but this simply is not true.

Also, I've heard that it's the assault on the 40-hour workweek. It is not. However, what is an assault on the 40-hour workweek is ObamaCare, which will force job creators to cut back their employees from full- time to part-time in order to keep their doors open. The decision to receive comp time is completely voluntary.

This is not a partisan issue. In 1985, Ted Kennedy, Harry Reid, Joe Biden, and Steny Hoyer all supported giving the public sector employees the flexibility to choose comp time.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill. I cannot think of a better Mother's Day gift. This is something we can do right now to help families at a time when they need it most.

Mr. Chair, on rollcall No. 113, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.''

(By unanimous consent, Mr. Flores was allowed to speak out of order.)

A Moment of Silence for the Victims in Boston, Massachusetts, and West,

Texas

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to discuss H.R. 1416, the Cancer Patient Protection Act of 2013.

On April 1, 2013, the Obama administration reduced Medicare payments to the costs of cancer-fighting drugs. This is having a devastating impact on seniors fighting cancer and the Nation's cancer care delivery system, which is already in crisis.

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, CMS, said that it does not have the authority to stop these devastating cuts to lifesaving chemotherapy drugs. That's why yesterday I introduced the Cancer Patient Protection Act of 2013, H.R. 1416, to ensure seniors, especially those on lower or fixed incomes, get the treatment they need.

The cuts the Obama administration is choosing to implement will jeopardize patient access to cancer care and result in higher overall costs for both seniors and the Medicare program by forcing patients into costlier hospital treatment settings.

The United States enjoys the most respected and most successful cancer care delivery system in the world. More than 60 percent of U.S. cancer patients rely on Medicare; and, until recently, over 80 percent of the Nation's cancer patients were treated by physicians in the community setting.

According to recent studies by Milliman and Avalere, community oncology clinics provide the most cost-effective model for delivering high-quality cancer services to elderly Americans. Despite this, a series of changes to Medicare reimbursements over the past decade have imperiled these vital innovations. The administration has decided to apply the sequester cut both to payments for part B drugs and to the 6 percent services payment.

A recent survey done by the Community Oncology Alliance shows the CMS cuts will force 72 percent of community cancer centers to stop seeing new Medicare patients, or not see Medicare patients without secondary insurance, and/or send Medicare patients elsewhere for treatment, such as costly hospitals, where treatment costs more.

When community cancer centers are forced to close their doors or limit services, access to cancer care is compromised for all cancer patients, especially the vulnerable population of seniors who rely on Medicare and those on fixed incomes and lower income individuals whose options are already limited.

Fortunately, the Secretary of Health and Human Services has the authority to protect against further destabilization of the community cancer care safety net.

The Office of Management and Budget, OMB, directed all Federal agencies to ``use any available flexibility to reduce operational risks and minimize impacts on the agency's core mission in service of the American people'' and to ``identify and address operational challenges that could potentially have a significant deleterious effect on the agency's mission or otherwise raise life, safety, or health concerns.''

Further, the Social Security Act compels the Secretary to adhere to the Average Sales Price-based formula that Congress established under the Medicare Modernization Act of 2003. The Social Security Act expressly mandates that the Secretary reimburse physicians at 106 percent of ASP for office-administered drugs, providing detailed directions to the Secretary on how to calculate the average sales price.

Congress has distinguished the Medicare drug payment methodology, and these provisions warrant deference under sequestration and guidance from the OMB.

By passing this bill, we are ensuring that everything can be done to prevent these cuts from going into effect. I encourage my colleagues to support this important piece of legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the House budget proposal for the 2014 fiscal year. This proposal sets real practical goals that will stop spending money we don't have

by cutting wasteful spending, fix our broken Tax Code to create jobs and increase wages, protect and strengthen important priorities like Medicare and national security, reform welfare programs like Medicaid so that we can deliver on the promises that we have made for those who truly need it, and repeal the President's health care bill so that we can finally replace it with meaningful patient-centered health care.

Most importantly, it reduces the deficit and the debt that we have, and it becomes balanced in 10 years. I am continuously amazed by those on the other side of the aisle who say that this is just crazy talk that we would balance the Federal budget in 10 years.

Mr. Speaker, this addresses the issues and the goals that will create a pro-growth economy and which will affect every American family across this country.

I thank the chairman for the hard work that he and the House Budget Committee have done on this incredible effort for a new plan to balance the budget in 10 years.

This proposal invites our friends across the aisle, President Obama, and the Senate to commit to the same commonsense goal. The 2014 House Republican budget sets a responsible precedent by ensuring our government lives within its means, just like millions of Americans across this country and just like my constituents back in North Carolina. I hear from them every day and they ask me: Why can't the Federal budget be balanced? Why can't Washington get its spending under control?

This proposal sets real, practical goals that will stop spending money we don't have, fix our broken Tax Code, protect and strengthen important priorities like Medicare and national security, reforms welfare programs like Medicaid so that it can deliver on the promises to deliver to those who are in most need. It also does repeal the President's health care plan and allows us to put in place real, sensible, patient-centered reforms for health care.

The House Republican budget reduces the deficit by $4.6 trillion over the next 10 years. This budget offers a plan to expand opportunity and creates jobs. While not sufficient by themselves, policy reforms at the Federal level can help foster an environment that promotes economic growth. This budget seeks to equip Americans with the skills to succeed in the 21st century economy and grow that economy.

Mr. Chairman, I support this bill and I believe the American people are looking for this leadership here in Washington, because they know that bureaucrats here in Washington do not know what they know back home.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Dr. Anne Marion Taylor of Chapel Hill, North Carolina, for receiving the 2013 Sloan Research Fellowship from the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation. Dr. Taylor, a Biomedical Engineer at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, will receive a two-year, $50,000 grant to expand her research in Neurosciences.

The fellowship is designed to provide supplemental funding and support to enhance the careers of its young recipients. This prestigious honor is reserved only for the best and brightest to highlight the newest generation of scientific leaders by opening new doors for those in the pursuit of scientific innovation.

Dr. Taylor researches neurosciences and biomedical engineering to find ways to better understand cellular mechanisms involved in cognition. As a result of Dr. Taylor's studies, we now have commercially available devices that have led to breakthroughs in the study of synapse development.

I congratulate Dr. Taylor for this impressive achievement and thank her for her dedicated work at UNC School of Medicine.

Mr. Speaker, thank you to my distinguished colleague from North Carolina, whose passion and longstanding experience in this area have brought this great piece of legislation for us to be able to vote on today.

And I would just like to rise and say that I am in support of the rule and the underlying bill to the SKILLS Act.

Here in Congress we frequently hear from our constituents back home that we need to work with the President on many issues, and this is a perfect example of a piece of legislation that we are working on with President Barack Obama. The SKILLS Act directly addresses what the President recently called ``a maze of confusing training programs.''

This is our chance to come together and create meaningful, commonsense reform that will help struggling Americans pull themselves up out of unemployment and empower them to better provide for their families. It would also create a single Workforce Investment Fund. It basically streamlines numerous ineffective, redundant programs, and it allows for every American to better themselves.

I can only think of whom this bill actually helps. I can think of the single mother who is working every day and wants to better help her family and have the flexibility to go back to school to our good community colleges in this country, to our technical schools. This bill cuts the red tape that our community colleges and our technical schools now face. And now we can help them. There are so many out there that need this help.

Mr. Speaker, this idea is not Republican and it is not Democrat. It is common sense. In fact, this bill is largely the same bill that came out of the Education and Workforce Committee last Congress, and most of the Democratic provisions have been retained.

I am also hearing from constituents back home. For instance, Dr. Larry Keen, president of Fayetteville Technical Community College, recently told my office:

I am in favor of the SKILLS Act and the purposes for which

it was created. Anything that contributes to the

simplification of a very complex system is of value.

Again, I rise today in support of this. I agree with Dr. Keen. I am here to say that I am calling on my colleagues to step away from this partisan attack and help us pass this bill. Additionally, I hope the Senate will do the same.

Thank you to my colleague, who has done such a wonderful job on this issue.

I rise today in support of the House substitution to the Violence Against Women Act, and I urge my colleagues in the House to vote ``yes'' on it as well.

Every now and then here in the House, rather than speaking about issues of cutting budgets and talking about issues that many people don't think affect them directly, we have the distinct opportunity to hold everyone up and to fight for a cause for women, for men, for families, for children. This is one of those times in which we are not necessarily talking about policy but we are talking about people. This is a very, very real issue, and it has strong bipartisan support so that we may move forward on these issues and take this off the table.

However, when we're talking about the Senate version and when we're talking about the House version, in my opinion, the House version is superior to the Senate version because it holds up all people. It does not segment individuals into certain groups and subcategories. It is all-inclusive. Violence across this country is pervasive. Women across this country are in families that they are trying to protect, and they feel the necessity to reach out, and we must help them.

I know there are many in this House who believe that there is not a Federal nexus on this issue. However, let's talk about the times that we might have Internet stalking across State lines. That becomes a Federal nexus. We must protect all victims. We must protect the victims of tribal violence as well, and I believe the House version is superior to the Senate version in that area as well.

Madam Speaker, this is a very, very important issue, and I urge my colleagues to follow along and, again, to vote ``yes'' on this amendment.