Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I've listened to the debate. Nobody on the Republican side has answered this question: Why not a vote on the clean

Mr. Speaker, I think it's deeply disturbing that someone comes here and talks about a park. That's important, but a park?

How about the children? How about the kids who need daycare? There are several billion spent on childcare and daycare in this country, and you're shutting it down.

What about health research? You talk about parks. What about health research that involves the needs of people in your districts where there's a park?

You're trying to evade reality. The reality is that you have to let all the hostages go, every single one of them. This Republican shutdown is a disgrace.

Here's what you need to do: face up to it, bring up the Senate bill, and let the majority work its will. The only reason you don't do it is because part of your caucus is being held hostage. Bring it up. Most of us Democrats will vote for it, and more and more Republicans will vote for it, and we will end this shutdown.

No more talk about parks. Let's get over this shutdown.

Mr. Speaker, I urge that we need to pause to consider the real meaning of what's happening tonight. This is more than about a vote or two. I think this is a fateful occasion. It signifies this:

The Republican Party in the House is being thoroughly radicalized. There are Republicans cheering as the U.S. ship of state goes over the cliff.

A House Republican colleague of ours said this, as reported today:

I do believe Republicans will be blamed. There are some, I

think, who would relish a showdown. I think that's

unfortunate. It's worse than unfortunate. It's historically

reckless and radical. This is an eventful and, I think,

shameful night for the Republican Party in the House of

Representatives.

Madam Speaker, this bill defunds still more than the Affordable Care Act. It undermines Medicare. It would end improvements in new prescription drug benefits, increases costs for those with Medicare Advantage, and hurts children covered by CHIP as well as the disabled. But this measure has still more peril for our country.

We in the House are like two ships passing in the night. House Republicans will pass this bill. It will sail off to the Senate, surely to return after the Senate has stripped off the effort to defund the Affordable Care Act. So then it will be squarely up to the Speaker of this House. Will he act as the captain of the entire House of Representatives or remain a captive of his right-wing Republican mates? Will he, as he acts, worry mainly about the risk to his Speakership or the risk to our entire Nation?

House Republicans, taking the ship over the cliff, will take the Nation's economic well-being with it. This is the inevitable danger of the course being chosen today by House Republicans. Only those blinded by rigid ideology can fail to see it.

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

So why are we going through the motions once again--I guess 41 times now? Because the health care reform train is rolling. It's picking up momentum, and the Republicans are once again trying to throw a monkey wrench in its way. In Michigan, 14 different insurance entities are competing. Tens and tens and tens of organizations are working to make this work. Medicaid is now available. Republicans see this happening, and they just can't stand the thought.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman), the ranking member of the Energy and Commerce Committee, and I ask unanimous consent that the balance of my time be managed by the gentleman from Washington (Mr. McDermott).

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

We are now 7 months into this House Republican session. It has been nothing more than a bridge to nowhere. Nowhere on jobs. Nowhere on immigration reform. Nowhere on a budget agreement. Nowhere on most appropriations bills.

Instead, House Republicans today continue their obsession--so vividly embraced by the chairman of our committee in his words--with trying to destroy the bridge built by the President and the Democratic Congress to somewhere vital--putting all Americans in charge of their own health care.

This bill before us is nothing more than a continuation of the Republicans' blind obsession with repealing the Affordable Care Act. This is how Republicans have chosen to spend the last day here before they recess this House for 5 weeks.

It's so clear. The Republican mission is to destroy, not implement, health care reform. Rather than help leading on the issue, House Republicans have spent the last 2-plus years trying to mislead Americans about health care rights under the ACA. Now we can expect more misinformation, and the statement of our chairman is loaded with it.

Thirteen States, for example, published preliminary premiums for marketplace coverage. Within those States, Americans will be able to purchase insurance at a price that is, on average, 20 percent below what the CBO estimated; and in Michigan, there will be 14 insurance carriers in the marketplace--and someone comes up here and says health care reform is failing.

So, to the American people, be prepared for more scare tactics and other misguided efforts from Republicans to convince constituents that applying for health care coverage will be time-consuming and cumbersome, and be prepared for all kinds of misstatements about the powers and the role of the IRS.

This should be said categorically. Neither the IRS nor the Department of Health and Human Services will have access to medical records or other personal history--no access whatsoever.

Five weeks of recess await Republicans when they adjourn this House today. I hope when they return they will at last turn their attention to the pressing economic issues that Americans expect the Congress to address.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. McDermott), another member of the committee.

(Mr. McDERMOTT asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 15 seconds.

Saying that the entire administration of health care is turned over to the IRS is a big lie. The IRS will not have access to the medical records or personal health history of a single American.

I now yield 2 minutes to a distinguished colleague of mine from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).

It's now a special pleasure for me to yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman who presided over the passage of Medicare 48 years ago and has worked on health care issues his entire historic career, Mr. Dingell from the State of Michigan.

(Mr. DINGELL asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

I now yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews), who has been a leader on this issue.

(Mr. ANDREWS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

I now yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Doggett), another distinguished member of our committee.

I yield an additional 15 seconds to the gentleman.

It is now my pleasure to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), the minority whip, who has devoted so much time to health care during his career.

I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Kind), another distinguished member of our committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Thompson), another distinguished member of our committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Crowley), another member of our committee.

I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. Speaker, could I ask for the amount of time on both sides, please?

Okay. We have other speakers. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez), who is the ranking member on the Small Business Committee.

Mr. Speaker, it's now my special privilege to yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), the person who led our efforts, and the health care reform is a testimony to her career, our leader.

Mr. Speaker, as I think everybody knows, the two committees, Energy and Commerce and Ways and Means, work closely together, and as chairs, Mr. Waxman and I were able to, with others, work so closely.

I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman), the ranking member on Energy and Commerce.

I now yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. McDermott), the ranking member on the Health Subcommittee of our committee.

(Mr. McDERMOTT asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, how much time is remaining?

I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews).

(Mr. ANDREWS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

I yield myself the balance of my time.

From the outset, I made clear my reaction to IRS mismanagement that called for relieving of duties of two people. But what the Republicans today are doing is using the IRS as a bootstrap to express their hatred of health care reform.

I want to say this and challenge anybody to refute it: assertions that the IRS will have access to personal health information are wrong and are deliberately misleading. The IRS will only receive routine information--name, address, family size, incomes, coverage status-- needed to provide tax credits. That's it. The rest are falsehoods.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

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

The bills today and the bill on Friday on ACA are more about politics than policy--politics at any cost by the Republican majority. They want to change the subject from their inability to legislate and their refusal to go to conference on a budget so that we could implement long-term deficit reduction and not threaten our economy

with default again this fall. In their abysmal failure to act on jobs legislation all of these months, there has been no real effort to join hands on their part on jobs--the number one concern of the American people. So they hope to launch their so-called ``Republican playbook'' for August by which they have told their Members to go home and echo the same message and reaffirm their theme--fighting Washington for you.

They have failed miserably to fight in Washington for you, the American people.

There was terrible mismanagement at the IRS in the Tax Exempt Division. I was among the first to call for the Acting Commissioner and Lois Lerner to be removed from their duties; but instead of exploiting the deep problems at the IRS Tax Exempt Division, instead of exploiting them for political purposes, we should be fixing these problems and restoring the trust of the American people in that entity, the entity to which they voluntarily pay taxes. The Republicans have desperately sought to tie their antigovernment message to the President. Let's review the Republican approach, some of it.

Chairman Issa said:

This was a targeting of the President's political enemies,

effectively, and lies about it during the election year so

that it wasn't discovered until afterwards.

Chairman Hal Rogers said:

Of course, the enemies list out of the White House that IRS

was engaged in shutting down or trying to shut down the

conservative political viewpoint across the country--an

enemies list that rivals those of another President some time

ago.

Totally, totally false.

The facts were clear that both conservative and liberal groups were in the groups set aside by the IRS for further scrutiny, and when that became clear, the Republicans shifted to the notion that the conservative groups received more scrutiny. When all evidence to date has indicated that there was no political motivation involved and that no one outside of the IRS was involved, the majority of Republicans here shifted to the notion that they don't have all of the documents, but the political motivation has been that of the Republicans.

I want to also, at this time, express our deep disappointment with the work of the IG and the audit that he did on the Tax Exempt Division. He failed to disclose that both conservative and liberal groups were set aside for further scrutiny. He failed to disclose that he asked his investigative arm to review 5,500 emails and that they found no evidence of political motivation. This flawed report set the stage for the Republicans' manipulation of the facts, and now we are going to spend months cleaning up that work.

As to the bills before us today, these three bills, we agree that the IRS should stop unnecessary conferences, that the employees should not do their work with any political motivation, and that taxpayer rights should be codified in the law.

This bill would impose a moratorium on conferences held by the IRS until the inspector general has submitted a report to Congress that certifies that all recommendations from the TIGTA audit of the IRS conference in Anaheim have been implemented. This audit report included nine recommendations, as the majority has now said, for the IRS to improve the oversight of conferences.

I just want the facts to be put on the table here as to what has happened by the leadership now of the IRS.

Three of the nine recommendations have been fully implemented, and it is anticipated that the remaining six recommendations will be put in place shortly, likely within 3 months. We all agree with the recommendations. The IRS has already agreed to those recommendations, and importantly, it must be acknowledged it is in the process of implementing all nine of these recommendations over the next few months.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Might I ask the gentleman, are you ready to close?

I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I think all of the recommendations make sense. We Democrats--throughout our Caucus and the President, all of us--joined in making clear what we thought of the mismanagement within the IRS and what we thought about the abuse of conferences.

As I said before, with this leadership of IRS appointed by the President, all of these recommendations either have been implemented or are in the process of being implemented. So, before the end of the year--I think well before it--this one problem--and there are others-- will be resolved. I support this bill.

I yield back the balance of my time.

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

I support this bill, and I think everybody will.

I think we all agree that IRS employees, indeed, should perform their duties in accordance with the taxpayers' rights outlined in this bill. These rights have been outlined a number of times in the National Taxpayer Advocate's annual report to Congress. In fact, Democrats in the past have introduced legislation to codify these rights, and the National Taxpayer Advocate's support for codifying these rights dates back to 2007.

I urge support of this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Let me spend a few minutes, if I might, discussing the context of this legislation and a bit of what's in it.

The Internal Revenue Service Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998 enacted a list of 10 ``acts or omissions''

for which IRS employees face mandatory firing. This bill would amend the 10th act or omission to expand existing grounds for termination to include political motivation.

We all agree that IRS employees should not act with a political purpose. We all passionately believe that. But I want it to be clear that because of the environment in which this bill is being considered, there is absolutely no evidence that any IRS employees acted with political motivation in the matter under investigation. The inspector general reviewed and concluded that ``there is no indication that pulling these selected applications was politically motivated.''

The inspector general has come before Congress repeatedly and testified numerous times that he has found no evidence of political motivation. At the very first hearing on this matter that was held in mid-May, the inspector general was asked if he found any evidence of political motivation in the selection of the tax exemption applications. He answered, ``We did not, sir.''

When questioned by my colleague on the Ways and Means Committee, Mr. McDermott, whether he stands behind the assertion that ``no one acted out of malice or political motivation,'' the inspector general answered, ``We have no evidence at this time to contradict that assertion, sir.''

When my colleague on the Ways and Means Committee, Mr. Becerra, asked him if it is correct that he did not find any evidence of political motivation here, the inspector general replied, ``That is correct, sir.''

In addition--and I want to emphasize this--staff from the Ways and Means Committee and Government Oversight Committees of this House have interviewed 17 IRS employees directly involved in this matter under oath, and none of these employees have suggested that the IRS actions were either politically motivated or the result of influence by any individual or organization outside of the IRS.

Finally, as I mentioned earlier, the IG asked his investigative arm to review 5,500 emails. The head of the investigation concluded, ``The emails indicated the organizations needed to be pulled because the IRS employees were not sure how to process them, not because they wanted to stall or hinder the application. There was no indication that pulling these applications was politically motivated. The email traffic indicated there were unclear processing directions and the group wanted to make sure they had guidance on processing the applications so they pulled them.''

It's clear that there's no evidence of political motivation by the IRS under investigation now. Indeed, there has been too much political motivation in this entire effort by Republicans.

I want to say just a few words about what's in the bill, and the gentleman from Ohio and I have discussed this. The majority did not follow regular order. This bill did not come before the Ways and Means Committee. It essentially was not considered either at the subcommittee level, I believe, or the full committee level. So the Republican majority, in my judgment, did not carefully draft their bill to ensure that it was consistent with the current statute. If it had done so, there might have been improvement to this legislation and added the language ``willful failure'' as it appears under four of the other acts and omissions.

I think this bill will go to the Senate, as it should. I hope if it considers it, it will take up this issue of whether or not there should be a willful requirement in terms of its conduct because we're talking about the ability administratively to discharge an employee.

I think if there is political motivation on their part, action should be taken. I think it is also important that we understand that there had to be some willfulness in that action.

I reserve the balance of my time.

It is now my pleasure to yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from New York (Mr. Crowley), a member of our committee and the vice chair of our caucus.

I yield an additional 1 minute to the gentleman.

Is the gentleman from Ohio ready to close?

I yield myself the balance of my time.

There's no question there should be no political motivation. So far there's been no evidence there was any.

This bill is being brought up in a context. It's outlined in the Republican playbook and, that is, go home and essentially go after the government. I think we should make sure in Washington that we act so the government acts on our behalf.

So everybody can reach their own judgment. I've told the gentleman from Ohio that the way you drafted it--and I'll just read this. The present language says ``threatening to audit a taxpayer for the purpose of extracting personal gain or benefit.'' That's the present language. Threatening is willful by definition. You can't threaten somebody unwillfully. Instead, we have new language, and I want to pick up the point of Mr. Crowley in terms of regular procedure. I mentioned it before.

It's important that we follow regular order in this institution. The bills before oversight were brought before the committee. We had no chance to act on this, and I would have suggested that the word ``willful'' be placed before it. However, everyone will vote as they wish on this. I think it will pass. It will go over to the Senate, and I will suggest if this passes and the Senate decides to act, that they take a clear look at whether there needs to be a requirement of an intentional misdeed as defined here because what we're talking about is the discharge of an employee; and whether it's IRS or some other government employee, whether in a local unit or any unit, it seems to me--or in the military, for example--I think we want to have some consideration of due process for them.

So that's the basis for the discussion here. This bill, I think, talks about political motivation. And I just wanted to add, as I end, the thought expressed before. There has been no evidence of political motivation by an IRS employee, and the effort to try to tie what happened there to the executive was an example of pure political motivation and terribly misguided and I think a harmful kind of connection when it did not exist. We should not do that in this country.

I yield back the balance of my time.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Well, here we go again. Another repeal vote, another political sideshow, and another blow to bipartisanship, which is so vital to addressing a whole host of important issues, including an issue important to our committee--tax reform. Instead of moving forward, once again my Republican colleagues are looking backwards.

The fact is that the President has taken an action that my Republican colleagues support. The administration determined that a delay of employer responsibility requirements was necessary in order to ensure effective implementation of the Tax Code, so it exercised its authority--longstanding administrative relief used by administrations of both parties for many years to grant transition relief.

The Republican response? The Republicans cannot leave well enough alone. They insist on maneuvering for political purposes. Duplicative legislation for purely political reasons that will go nowhere in the Senate and that serves only to set up their 38th vote to repeal the Affordable Care Act.

After the announcement, my colleague, Chairman Camp, in a new populist flourish, said:

The Obama administration's decision to give corporate

America a free pass while continuing to force average,

everyday Americans to abide by the law is deeply disturbing.

And the majority leader, Mr. Cantor, with hyperpopulism, said:

The President came down on the side of big business, but

left the American people out in the cold.

Out in the cold? Republican hypocrisy is reaching new heights. Under the Affordable Care Act, tens of millions of Americans will gain previously unavailable access to affordable health insurance. To date-- and I emphasize this--more than 6 million young adults have health insurance through their parents' plans, 6 million seniors have

saved $6.1 billion on prescription drugs, and 105 million Americans have received free preventative services.

And in State to State, Americans buying insurance within the new marketplaces will have access to coverage for less than they pay today. New Yorkers, for one, learned today that, on average, individual premiums within the marketplace will be half what they are today. They certainly do not feel left out in the cold.

Competition under ACA is working, and the Republicans call it ``socialism.''

The market reforms from the health law work together to eliminate the ability of insurance companies to discriminate on the basis of preexisting conditions and gender. But the system will only work and remain affordable if everyone has insurance. And the law provides the reforms and assistance to put affordable coverage within reach for everyone.

Without the shared responsibility, the law will not work and insurance premiums will skyrocket. 129 million people with preexisting conditions will once again be priced or forced out of coverage, and we will be back where we started.

Republicans know this. Why? Because the individual mandate was a Republican idea going all the way back to the 1980s, when the conservative Heritage Foundation originated the idea. Its supporters have argued:

All citizens should be required to obtain a basic level of

health insurance. Not having health insurance imposes a risk

of delaying medical care. It also may impose costs on others

because we, as a society, provide care to the uninsured. The

risk of shifting cost to others has led many States to

mandate that all drivers have liability insurance. The same

logic applies to health insurance.

But Republicans are not here today to act logically or take responsibility. They have never, never, never had a comprehensive health care reform plan. Instead, their only goal is to score political points.

So we urge, vote ``no'' on both bills.

I reserve the balance of my time, and I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from Washington (Mr. McDermott) control the balance of the time.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds.

I just want to put in the facts on the Sixth District where my friend Mr. Upton comes from, the Sixth District of Michigan:

6,700 young adults in the district now have health insurance through their parents' plan;

9,100 seniors have received prescription drug discounts;

131,000 seniors in the district are now eligible for preventive services without paying;

197,000 individuals now have health insurance that covers preventive services;

Up to 41,000 children in the district with preexisting health conditions can no longer be denied coverage by health insurers.

I now yield 2 minutes to a member of our committee, the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Kind).

Madam Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds.

I just want to review the benefits of the gentleman's district that he represents:

5,400 young adults now have health insurance through their parents' plans;

more than 6,900 seniors receive prescription drug discounts;

100,000 seniors are now eligible for Medicare preventative services without paying any co-pays, coinsurance, or deductibles;

209,000 individuals now have health insurance that covers preventative services without pay;

Up to 42,000 children in the district with preexisting health conditions can no longer be denied coverage by health insurers.

That's what the ACA is doing.

It is now my privilege to yield 2 minutes to another distinguished member of our committee, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Crowley).

Madam Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds.

The application, Mr. Roskam, is three pages. Let me also mention what's in play in your district and why ACA matters:

5,200 young adults have insurance through their parents;

7,800 seniors have discounts for prescription drugs;

87,000 seniors are now eligible for preventative services without paying;

243,000 individuals now have health insurance covering preventative services without these co-pays;

234,000 individuals are saving money.

I yield myself an additional 15 seconds.

Due to ACA provisions that prevent insurance companies from spending more than 20 percent of their premiums, now 35,000 individuals have insurance that cannot place lifetime limits on their coverage.

So when you pick up a book with hundreds of pages, tell your constituents what it means for them.

I am now privileged to yield 2 minutes to a gentleman from Energy and Commerce who has played such a decisive role in the reform of health care, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone).

I yield myself 45 seconds.

I would just like to ask the gentleman from Arkansas if the small business person he mentioned has any health coverage for his employees. What we need to do is to continue this law and its implementation so that those employees will have some health insurance.

In his district, because of ACA, 9,500 young adults have insurance through their parents;

3,400 seniors have received prescription drug discounts;

125,000 seniors are now eligible for preventative services without paying co-pays, et cetera.

Benefits of the Health Care Reform Law in the 2nd Congressional

District of Arkansas

Committees on Energy and Commerce, Ways and Means, and Education and

the Workforce, Democratic Staff Report, July 2013

The landmark Affordable Care Act (ACA) began delivering

important new benefits and protections to tens of millions of

American families almost immediately after it was signed into

law by President Obama. But the largest benefits of the law

will become available to consumers on October 1, 2013, when

health insurance marketplaces open in all 50 states. These

marketplaces will offer individuals, families, and small

businesses an efficient, transparent one-stop shop to compare

health insurance policies, receive financial assistance, and

sign up for high-quality, affordable, and secure insurance

coverage.

This fact sheet summarizes new data on the significant

benefits of the health care reform law in Rep. Griffin's

district. It also provides the first picture of the impacts

of the law in districts redrawn or newly create following the

2010 Census. As a result of the law:

9,500 young adults in the district now have health

insurance through their parents' plan.

More than 3,400 seniors in the district received

prescription drug discounts worth $7.6 million, an average

discount of $600 per person in 2011, $730 in 2012, and $990

thus far in 2013.

125,000 seniors in the district are now eligible for

Medicare preventive services without paying any co-pays,

coinsurance, or deductible.

195,000 individuals in the district--including 41,000

children and 81,000 women--now have health insurance that

covers preventive services without any co-pays, coinsurance,

or deductible.

158,000 individuals in the district are saving money due to

ACA provisions that prevent insurance companies from spending

more than 20% of their premiums on profits and administrative

overhead. Because of these protections, over 34,200 consumers

in the district received approximately $3.2 million in

insurance company rebates in 2012 and 2011--an average rebate

of $49 per family in 2012 and $114 per family in 2011.

Up to 42,000 children in the district with preexisting

health conditions can no longer be denied coverage by health

insurers.

223,000 individuals in the district now have insurance that

cannot place lifetime limits on their coverage and will not

face annual limits on coverage starting in 2014.

113,000 individuals in the district who lack health

insurance will have access to quality, affordable coverage

without fear of discrimination or higher rates because of a

preexisting health condition. In addition, the 40,000

individuals who currently purchase private health insurance

on the individual or small group market will have access to

more secure, higher quality coverage and many will be

eligible for financial assistance.

It is now my privilege to yield 2 minutes to the ranking member on Small Business, who has worked so hard on health care reform and with sensitivity to the small businesses of this country, the gentlelady from New York (Ms. Velazquez).

Mr. Speaker, could you tell us the time on each side, please.

At this time, I insert into the Record the benefits of health care reform in the 18th District of Pennsylvania.

Benefits of the Health Care Reform Law in the 18th Congressional

District of Pennsylvania

Committees on Energy and Commerce, Ways and Means, and Education and

the Workforce, Democratic Staff Report, July 2013

The landmark Affordable Care Act (ACA) began delivering

important new benefits and protections to tens of millions of

American families almost immediately after it was signed into

law by President Obama. But the largest benefits of the law

will become available to consumers on October 1, 2013, when

health insurance marketplaces open in all 50 states. These

marketplaces will offer individuals, families, and small

businesses an efficient, transparent one-stop shop to compare

health insurance policies, receive financial assistance, and

sign up for high-quality, affordable, and secure insurance

coverage.

This fact sheet summarizes new data on the significant

benefits of the health care reform law in Rep. Murphy's

district. It also provides the first picture of the impacts

of the law in districts redrawn or newly created following

the 2010 Census. As a result of the law:

3,800 young adults in the district now have health

insurance through their parents' plan.

More than 15,300 seniors in the district received

prescription drug discounts worth $23.1 million, an average

discount of $620 per person in 2011, $800 in 2012, and $730

thus far in 2013.

133,000 seniors in the district are now eligible for

Medicare preventive services without paying any co-pays,

coinsurance, or deductible.

230,000 individuals in the district--including 45,000

children and 97,000 women--now have health insurance that

covers preventive services without any co-pays, coinsurance,

or deductible.

181,000 individuals in the district are saving money due to

ACA provisions that prevent insurance companies from spending

more than 20% of their premiums on profits and administrative

overhead. Because of these protections, over 35,800 consumers

in the district received approximately $3.6 million in

insurance company rebates in 2012 and 2011--an average rebate

of $77 per family in 2012 and $165 per family in 2011.

Up to 35,000 children in the district with preexisting

health conditions can no longer be denied coverage by health

insurers.

266,000 individuals in the district now have insurance that

cannot place lifetime limits on their coverage and will not

face annual limits on coverage starting in 2014.

Up to 49,000 individuals in the district who lack health

insurance will have access to quality, affordable coverage

without fear of discrimination or higher rates because of a

preexisting health condition. In addition, the 40,000

individuals who currently purchase private health insurance

on the individual or small group market will have access to

more secure, higher quality coverage and many will be

eligible for financial assistance.

I now yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Meeks).

I now yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Barrow).

At this time, I insert into the Record a document showing the benefits of health care reform in the 12th Congressional District of Florida.

Benefits of the Health Care Reform Law in the 12th Congressional

District of Florida

Committees on Energy and Commerce, Ways and Means, and Education and

the Workforce Democratic Staff Report, July 2013

The landmark Affordable Care Act (ACA) began delivering

important new benefits and protections to tens of millions of

American families almost immediately after it was signed into

law by President Obama. But the largest benefits of the law

will become available to consumers on October 1, 2013, when

health insurance marketplaces open in all 50 states. These

marketplaces will offer individuals, families, and small

businesses an efficient, transparent one-stop shop to compare

health insurance policies, receive financial assistance, and

sign up for high-quality, affordable, and secure insurance

coverage.

This fact sheet summarizes new data on the significant

benefits of the health care reform law in Rep. Bilirakis's

district. It also provides the first picture of the impacts

of the law in districts redrawn or newly created following

the 2010 Census. As a result of the law:

6,100 young adults in the district now have health

insurance through their parents' plan.

More than 10,200 seniors in the district received

prescription drug discounts worth $12.9 million, an average

discount of $550 per person in 2011, $660 in 2012, and $720

thus far in 2013.

153,000 seniors in the district are now eligible for

Medicare preventive services without paying any co-pays,

coinsurance, or deductible.

190,000 individuals in the district--including 41,000

children and 79,000 women--now have health insurance that

covers preventive services without any co-pays, coinsurance,

or deductible.

164,000 individuals in the district are saving money due to

ACA provisions that prevent insurance companies from spending

more than 20% of their premiums on profits and administrative

overhead. Because of these protections, over 53,500 consumers

in the district received approximately $7.6 million in

insurance company rebates in 2012 and 2011--an average rebate

of $132 per family in 2012 and $168 per family in 2011.

Up to 36,000 children in the district with preexisting

health conditions can no longer be denied coverage by health

insurers.

216,000 individuals in the district now have insurance that

cannot place lifetime limits on their coverage and will not

face annual limits on coverage starting in 2014.

Up to 97,000 individuals in the district who lack health

insurance will have access to quality, affordable coverage

without fear of discrimination or higher rates because of a

preexisting health condition. In addition, the 45,000

individuals who currently purchase private health insurance

on the individual or small group market will have access to

more secure, higher quality coverage and many will be

eligible for financial assistance.

It's now my pleasure to yield as much time as he may consume to the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Larson), a leader on the health care issue.

I will reserve the balance of my time.

At this time, I insert into the Record a document showing benefits of the health care reform law in the 16th Congressional District of Ohio.

Benefits of the Health Care Reform Law in the 16th Congressional

District of Ohio

Committees on Energy and Commerce, Ways and Means, and Education and

the Workforce, Democratic Staff Report, July 2013

The landmark Affordable Care Act (ACA) began delivering

important new benefits and protections to tens of millions of

American families almost immediately after it was signed into

law by President Obama. But the largest benefits of the law

will become available to consumers on October 1, 2013, when

health insurance marketplaces open in all 50 states. These

marketplaces will offer individuals, families, and small

businesses an efficient, transparent one-stop shop to compare

health insurance policies, receive financial assistance, and

sign up for high-quality, affordable, and secure insurance

coverage.

This fact sheet summarizes new data on the significant

benefits of the health care reform law in Rep. Renacci's

district. It also provides the first picture of the impacts

of the law in districts redrawn or newly created following

the 2010 Census. As a result of the law:

4,800 young adults in the district now have health

insurance through their parents' plan.

More than 10,100 seniors in the district received

prescription drug discounts worth $13.7 million, an average

discount of $510 per person in 2011, $770 in 2012, and $990

thus far in 2013.

104,000 seniors in the district are now eligible for

Medicare preventive services without paying any co-pays,

coinsurance, or deductible.

228,000 individuals in the district--including 51,000

children and 92,000 women--now have health insurance that

covers preventive services without any co-pays, coinsurance,

or deductible.

200,000 individuals in the district are saving money due to

ACA provisions that prevent insurance companies from spending

more than 20% of their premiums on profits and administrative

overhead. Because of these protections, over 10,200 consumers

in the district received approximately $800,000 in insurance

company rebates in 2011 and 2012--an average rebate of $133

per family in 2012 and $139 per family in 2011.

Up to 40,000 children in the district with preexisting

health conditions can no longer be denied coverage by health

insurers.

272,000 individuals in the district now have insurance that

cannot place lifetime limits on their coverage and will not

face annual limits on coverage starting in 2014.

Up to 68,000 individuals in the district who lack health

insurance will have access to quality, affordable coverage

without fear of discrimination or higher rates because of a

preexisting health condition.

In addition, the 37,000 individuals who currently purchase

private health insurance on the individual or small group

market will have access to more secure, higher quality

coverage and many will be eligible for financial assistance.

Mr. Speaker, how much time do we have remaining?

Mr. Speaker, it is now my pleasure to yield the balance of our time on this bill to the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman), the ranking member of Energy and Commerce and who is proudly one of the coauthors of health care reform after so many years of his efforts.

Mr. Speaker, I submit this report, which shows that hundreds of thousands of constituents in the 7th district of Tennessee benefit from various provisions in the Affordable Care Act.

Benefits of the Health Care Reform Law in the 7th Congressional

District of Tennessee

Committees on Energy and Commerce, Ways and Means, and Education and

the Workforce, Democratic Staff Report, July 2013

The landmark Affordable Care Act (ACA) began delivering

important new benefits and protections to tens of millions of

American families almost immediately after it was signed into

law by President Obama. But the largest benefits of the law

will become available to consumers on October 1, 2013, when

health insurance marketplaces open in all 50 states. These

marketplaces will offer individuals, families, and small

businesses an efficient, transparent one-stop shop to compare

health insurance policies, receive financial assistance, and

sign up for high-quality, affordable, and secure insurance

coverage.

This fact sheet summarizes new data on the significant

benefits of the health care reform law in Rep. Blackburn's

district. It also provides the first picture of the impacts

of the law in districts redrawn or newly created following

the 2010 Census. As a result of the law:

5,900 young adults in the district now have health

insurance through their parents' plan.

More than 8,000 seniors in the district received

prescription drug discounts worth $10 million, an average

discount of $580 per person in 2011, $610 in 2012, and $960

thus far in 2013.

116,000 seniors in the district are now eligible for

Medicare preventive services without paying any co-pays,

coinsurance, or deductible.

191,000 individuals in the district--including 50,000

children and 75,000 women--now have health insurance that

covers preventive services without any co-pays, coinsurance,

or deductible.

181,000 individuals in the district are saving money due to

ACA provisions that prevent insurance companies from spending

more than 20% of their premiums on profits and administrative

overhead. Because of these protections, over 27,900 consumers

in the district received approximately $4 million in

insurance company rebates in 2012 and 2011--an average rebate

of $69 per family in 2012 and $201 per family in 2011.

Up to 44,000 children in the district with preexisting

health conditions can no longer be denied coverage by health

insurers.

208,000 individuals in the district now have insurance that

cannot place lifetime limits on their coverage and will not

face annual limits on coverage starting in 2014.

Up to 91,000 individuals in the district who lack health

insurance will have access to quality, affordable coverage

without fear of discrimination or higher rates because of a

preexisting health condition. In addition, the 39,000

individuals who currently purchase private health insurance

on the individual or small group market will have access to

more secure, higher quality coverage and many will be

eligible for financial assistance.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. Chair, I strongly oppose the offshore drilling bill before the House. Sadly, this legislation is representative of the unbalanced, partisan, and ultimately self-defeating approach that the Republican Majority has taken on energy issues.

H.R. 2231 would mandate lease sales along the east and west coasts and elsewhere with inadequate environmental review and scant attention given to local concerns. In total, leasing would be mandated off the coasts of 14 states, whether they want it or not. If this heavy-handed giveaway to the oil industry seems familiar, that's because it is. Last July, the Republican leadership brought a nearly identical bill before the House. That bill never advanced beyond the House, and this drilling bill won't either. The Senate won't take it up. The President has said he'd veto it, so other than demonstrating the Majority's fealty to Big Oil, why are we again wasting the House's time on this?

We're told that this bill is about making the U.S. more energy independent. Let the record show that domestic energy production is booming under the current Administration's policies. In 2012, American oil production reached a 20-year high. Natural gas production is at an all-time high. The U.S. is expected to surpass Saudi Arabia as the world's top oil producer within seven years.

We're also told that this bill is all about driving down gas prices for American families. What guarantee do we have that the oil and gas production mandated by this legislation would actually stay in the United States? Over the last decade, U.S. exports of petroleum products like gasoline and diesel fuel have nearly tripled. Every day U.S. refineries export millions of gallons of refined petroleum products, including gasoline and diesel. This is no doubt good for the petroleum industry's bottom line, but it's hard to argue that it helps consumers at the pump.

At the end of the day, the country needs an all-the-above energy strategy, including responsible oil and gas development, increased energy efficiency, support for renewable energy, and investment in advanced energy research and development. Unfortunately, the House Majority remained locked in an oil-above-all policy. The oil drilling bill before the House deserves to be defeated.

Mr. Chair, I was unavoidably absent earlier today during rollcall vote 302. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall vote 302, the Capps amendment to H.R. 2231, the Offshore Energy and Jobs Act.

Well, Mr. Dingell, there are many aspects of life that I could comment on, for example, friendship.

Our families have known each other well over 75 years, going back to the relationship between your father and some of my relatives. It's been a long time. And I could talk about the friendship between yourself and your wife, Debbie, and our family for part of that time.

I could also talk about your accomplishments, and there have been so many. I remember when I first came, how we worked to clean up the Rouge River; and without your efforts, I think today it would be more like it was than it now is.

We could talk about health care and your historical role. We could talk about broader issues of clean water and clean air. We could talk about your devotion to the auto industry of this country and what would have happened all these years except for your dedication. And there are more accomplishments that I could talk about.

But instead, let me just say a few words about what struck me as you spoke a few weeks ago--was it?--as we were celebrating your tenure. And you spoke at some length. The rumor is that Debbie, a few times, said, cut it a bit shorter, but you went on; and the reason I think you did is what I want to speak about.

You began to talk about your years here, not in terms of the number of years, but what you have seen about this institution. And I think all of us who were there were glad that you continued to talk, because you've been here 55 years as a Member, and you've seen the changes, you've seen how there was a greater sense of working together in this place.

You saw and were a key part of sure differences and, with you, sometimes sharp questioning, but there was a greater feel of common purpose in this unparalleled institution, and you spoke how we have lost some of it.

So that's really what I wanted to focus on, because if anybody can speak about the need for all of us who work here and all of us who are Members here, if there's anybody who can remind us of how the importance of this institution should determine how we relate to each other, it's John Dingell.

And I must confess, as I listened to your words, I felt that there had been something lost and that you reminded us it was vital that we regain. And it was interesting, you didn't really want to talk about anything else except your love for Debbie and this institution.

So you, in a sense, are Mr. Institution. And your belief in it, your belief in our need to remind ourselves as to how we must try to work together, how we must try to relate, how we must try to take our basic principles--and you really have them--to use them not as a wall, but as an opportunity to proceed.

So we owe you a lot. Your constituents owe you a lot, though you'll deny it. But all of us, I think, owe you immensely for the years you have served here, for your dedication, for your honesty, and for your reminding people in this institution why it was founded.

In that sense, I think you are the exemplar of what sparked this creation in its first place. Keep going, keep reminding, and I hope we'll begin to follow better than we have.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commemorate World Refugee Day and recognize the more than 43 million forcibly displaced people around the world, a number of whom--in search of a better life in America-- have resettled in Michigan's Macomb and Oakland counties, which I proudly represent.

World Refugee Day is observed June 20 of each year and is dedicated to raising awareness of the plight of the millions of refugees and internally displaced persons who have been forced to flee their homes due to conflict, persecution, and strife. This day serves as a special reminder of the courage of these resilient individuals and provides us the opportunity to draw attention to their struggle.

The United States is by far the largest donor to the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR), and this commitment from the American people has helped deliver critical humanitarian aid to the world's most vulnerable populations. U.S.-supported work of the UNHCR includes providing safe food, clean drinking water, shelter, education, security in dangerous situations, and ultimately durable placement options--voluntary repatriation, local integration, or resettlement.

Today is also a time to recognize the positive contributions of refugees who have created new lives in this country. Due to America's historic commitment to welcoming and resettling victims of persecution from around the world, communities all over the country have benefited from refugees' enthusiasm, entrepreneurial spirit, and sense of civic engagement.

Over the last ten years, thousands of Iraqi refugees have resettled in my district--a development that has had a positive impact on the region. I value their contributions and am proud to support the work of local resettlement organizations to integrate new arrivals into American society. This past April, I had the opportunity to visit with the Chaldean American Ladies of Charity at their food bank and home goods warehouse. There I met a young Iraqi mother and her son, both of whom had recently arrived in the United States and resettled in Metro Detroit. The efforts of the established Chaldean community to assist recent refugees were truly impressive, and I was struck by how grateful the mother was for the opportunity to start a new life for her family in the United States.

Today, as we mark World Refugee Day, I urge my colleagues to renew their commitment to providing humanitarian aid and resettlement assistance to victims of ethnic, religious and political persecution as well as other vulnerable people who have been forced to flee their homes due to natural or man-made disasters.