Providing for Consideration of H.R. 3162, Children's Health and Medicare Protection Act of 2007
Floor Speech
PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 3162, CHILDREN'S HEALTH AND MEDICARE PROTECTION ACT OF 2007 -- (House of Representatives - August 01, 2007)
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, while the CBO estimate in the report from the Committee on Ways and Means does not identify any unfunded mandates, it's important to note that there are and that there is no such estimate for the amendment self-executed by the closed rule reported in the dead of night by the majority's Rules Committee. We have no way of knowing whether these new provisions, which we did not see before midnight last night, will impose strict new intergovernmental mandates on our State and local governments.
Furthermore, this new language appears to be littered with earmarks for hospital-specific projects. We do not have a list of the Members requesting those projects, and we do not know if the proper certifications have been filed with the authorizing committees.
Therefore, Madam Speaker, it is essential that we stop, take a breather and put off consideration of this hastily drafted legislation, which was totally rewritten in the dead of night, behind closed doors.
I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the question of consideration.
I yield to the gentleman from California.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
r. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, the new Democrat majority promised the American people and those Republicans who are now in the minority that this would be an open and transparent new way of doing business by Democrats. We were told back in January and February, oh, the only reason we're doing closed rules is because we've got to do them to get our agenda through quickly, because we're not going to allow anybody to stop that. Six in '06 has to be done.
Well, Madam Speaker, there were no hearings even done on this with the text of the bill that the committee could look at. Last night, 30 minutes before we went into Rules Committee, we had an opportunity to see the language.
On top of the $200 billion Medicare cuts, the Democrats have now slipped in extra hospital funding for powerful Democrat districts. That means where Democrats are they've slipped in these brand new earmarks, right there for them.
We have not had an opportunity to look at the bill, we don't know whether the proper notification has been done, and so what we're saying now today is that what we should do is take a few minutes and sit back and look.
I yield to the gentleman from California.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, last night in the Rules Committee we had an opportunity to see firsthand what this new Democrat majority is all about. And not one time, not one time, was the word let's make health care better for America, not one time was it about trying to make things better for doctors and hospitals and patients. It was a slam dunk, hit 'em out of bounds, the doctors, who they claim make all this money, who it's all about the doctors making money.
And I had an opportunity to engage those people who represented the Ways and Means Committee and the Commerce Committee, and I said, hey, during your hearings, that you talk about you having all these hearings, did anyone ever bring up that specialty hospitals are those many times joint ventures with hospitals where they're trying to take care of patients who come for elective surgeries to get them out of hospitals that are full, emergency rooms that are backed up, and then we've got a problem with health because of bacteria in the hospitals. And these hospitals are safer and offer elective surgery to get people in and out that is much cheaper and safer and better.
They acted like it was a foreign concept. They acted like they had never heard about the marketplace before.
I yield to the gentleman from California.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, we believe that the earmarks which have been presented, which the way this bill has come to the floor, is not properly done. It did not follow regular order. It is without the transparency that the new Democrat majority has touted and talks about every single day. It is without the smell test of ethics to know, straight up, what somebody is going to spend money on, the people's money. And because of that, we are opposing and asking that this bill go back and be properly done to where everyone can understand.
I reserve the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, I believe that the case that we are making here today is a smell test, and that is that if the new Democrat majority wants to have closed rules, not have openness with regular order, not present bills before they would be voted on to allow people enough time to see what is in them and to be transparent about what is in the bills and who is getting the money and who is spending the money, you have not passed the smell test. And thus we are asking that you not do what you are doing.
We oppose the Democrat majority.
Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to yet another closed rule and to the ill-conceived underlying legislation.
While I do not support this bill nor the way it has been brought to the floor without a single legislative markup, I would like to thank the Democratic leadership for one thing: By cramming this bill through the House, they are giving every single Member of this body the opportunity to go on record regarding which vision for the future our Nation's health care system should take.
Madam Speaker, for that, I truly appreciate and respect what the Democrat leadership has done.
The first vision for our future, for them, is to slowly shift as many Americans as possible into a one-size-fits-all government program. You know what it has been called in the past: Socialized medicine.
I congratulate the Democrat leadership, because that vision is ably embodied in the bill today, H.R. 3162. Rather than using this bill as an opportunity to cover children who cannot obtain coverage through Medicaid or the private market, this bill uses children as pawns in their cynical attempt to make millions of Americans completely reliant upon the government for their health care needs. And you know what they say, Madam Speaker: If you think health care is expensive now, wait until it's free.
Democrat advocates of bureaucrat-run, Washington-run health care fails to disclose how they would achieve this vision. Republicans who actually care about covering children created SCHIP so that children who had no insurance coverage through Medicaid or the insurance market could get it without bankrupting the Federal Government or dislocating a healthy marketplace.
H.R. 3162 turns this innovative vision on its head by increasing government spending exponentially, leaving taxpayers holding the bag for these increased costs. This bill has no income limits for eligibility, no annual authorization limit, and allows States to determine who qualifies, despite the fact that the Federal Government is on the hook 100 percent of the time. This is on top of a current system which we know that some States already abuse. Minnesota spends 61 percent of its children's health care insurance on adults, while Wisconsin spends 75 percent of its children's health care money on adults, taking scarce resources away from the intended target, children.
But the real losers under this big government vision are patients. For 100 children who are enrolled in the new SCHIP proposal, 25 to 50 children will leave private insurance, according to the Congressional Budget Office; 77 percent of children at between 200 and 300 percent of the Federal poverty level already had insurance in 2005.
As we all know, being a part of the government-run health care program does not mean better quality. Since most SCHIP programs reimburse at Medicaid rates, many of these new SCHIP enrollees will encounter significant difficulties accessing care. American Medicaid patients, for example, are currently waiting as long to see a specialist or to have surgery as patients in Canada.
If Democrats were serious about ensuring that every American has access to inexpensive and high-quality health care, we would be taking a different vision and a different direction for our health care; one that tackles the system's real underlying problems and revolutionizes and gives incentives to our health care system to provide better results.
All families should have access to tax exemptions up to $15,000 a year for health care, not just those who work for large employers. Congress should spend its time passing a law to give Americans the ability to purchase health insurance across State lines, because health insurance options should not be limited by your zip code.
Congress should be working to ensure that those who can't get insurance on the market have access to coverage through high-risk pools and low-income tax credits.
Madam Speaker, I am not here to oppose the idea of SCHIP. It was a Republican-controlled Congress that created SCHIP. I do support its true mission. But H.R. 3162 is a camouflaged attempt at slowly siphoning Americans away from insurance plans into a big, Washington, D.C. government-run system.
To pay for this flawed, big government vision, this legislation robs seniors by forcing many of them out of their existing Medicare coverage at a time when our Nation is looking for better ways to sustain Medicare's future. Medicare part C is an innovative plan that is working well by bringing choices into Medicare. After these seniors are harmed in the long run, it is the taxpayers who will be stuck with the rest of the bill for this incredible expansion of government and intrusion into our lives in taking away our choices.
Republicans have already proven this would be a positive, innovative vision that can work. Two years ago, Members from both sides of the aisle came together to pass the Dylan Lee James Family Opportunity Act, or FOA. We learned that many children with disabilities fell into a catch-22 circumstance in which their families made too much to qualify for Medicaid but could not afford or access private coverage, so these children often went without coverage. FOA was a commonsense solution which filled a void and provided coverage for these children up to 300 percent of the poverty level.
Madam Speaker, we have two serious issues facing our Nation that we are dealing with right now: Medicare's future, and making our Nation's health insurance system more affordable and accessible for all Americans. By focusing the wrong vision for our future, the bill does nothing to address either problem.
It ignores the fact that our Nation produced the greatest health care advocates in the world, many of which come as a result of a competitive insurance market. The American survival rate for leukemia is 50 percent. The European rate is just right at 35 percent. For prostate cancer, the American survival rate is 81.2 percent. In France, it is 61.7 percent, and in England, it is 44.3 percent.
Rather than trying to emulate the European socialized, outdated approach, we should be working on a vision to give every single American an opportunity to take part in our competitive insurance market.
Madam Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to oppose this closed rule and the underlying legislation to drag America into a one-size-fits-all model of defeatism. Returning the balance of power, once again, to Washington, D.C. to run our health care plan is what the new Democrat majority is all about.
Madam Speaker, I oppose that.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, these debates are great. It gives everybody on both sides, including the Democrats who ran on an agenda of having socialized medicine, Washington, D.C.-run health care, they can come down to the floor of the House and talk about this is their model of a great bill.
We disagree.
Madam Speaker, I yield 5 1/2 minutes to the gentleman from Pasco, Washington (Mr. Hastings).
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. SESSIONS. Welcome to the new Democrat-run House of Representatives: No debate added time. No regular order hearings. Closed rules. Welcome.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source