Press Conference with Reps. Pelosi, Hoyer, Becerra and Emanuel on the State Children's Health Insurance Program

Interview

Press Conference with Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-MD), Rep. Xavier Becerra (D-CA), Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-IL) Subject: State Children's Health Insurance Program

Copyright ©2007 by Federal News Service, Inc., Ste. 500, 1000 Vermont Ave, Washington, DC 20005 USA. Federal News Service is a private firm not affiliated with the federal government. No portion of this transcript may be copied, sold or retransmitted without the written authority of Federal News Service, Inc. Copyright is not claimed as to any part of the original work prepared by a United States government officer or employee as a part of that person's official duties. For information on subscribing to the FNS Internet Service at www.fednews.com, please email Jack Graeme at jack@fednews.com or call 1-800-211-4020.

SPEAKER PELOSI: We'll be joined by our distinguished majority leader momentarily. He's engaged in the colloquy on the floor.

Today we took another step forward in providing health insurance for 10 million American children. It's an interesting vote. Although we had a number of absences on both sides, we had a situation where, on the motion to recommit, the Republicans, who all day railed against the increase in taxes in the package, in their motion to recommit had the same 61-cent tax. The only thing is, they had fewer children covered by it, approximately 3 million fewer children. They made a point of saying in their presentation that the tax was the same as in the underlying bill.

Their motion to recommit last time, when the bill first came up, was, they had a 45-cent tax in a motion to recommit. So this whole argument about increasing taxes is bogus, as witnessed by their own motion to recommit.

What is disturbing about it, though, is, with the same amount of income, they insured 3 million fewer children.

So we have some things to work out between us, but I really have no doubt that the conversations that are going on between Democrats and Republicans, House and Senate, will result on (sic) a bill going to the president's desk that will ultimately result in the 10 million children being covered.

I salute my colleagues for the level of debate that was engaged in today, the focus on children. That has been the focus of this Congress.

I mentioned to some of you earlier, this Congress has been bipartisan and overwhelmingly supportive of children -- every issue that you can name. Whether it's the security of the homeland that impacts the safety of our children -- passed by overwhelming bipartisan support. Whether it's the health of our children, which once again today got a big bipartisan vote, but that is to be continued. Whether it's the education of our children, to expand their opportunity with college affordability, the biggest package since the 1944 G.I. Bill of Rights -- strong bipartisan support. Whether it's the strength of our families through the economic security of those families with raising the minimum wage -- first time in 10 years -- and passing our innovation agenda to keep good-paying jobs and businesses in the United States -- overwhelming bipartisan support. And whether it's the air our children breathe and the water they drink in our energy bill that we passed, those interests are protected.

So our children's health, their education, the economic security of their families, the safety of their neighborhoods, the security of the nation in which they live -- this Congress has worked in a bipartisan way to support that. And once again, we did today. With that, I'm pleased to yield to the distinguished -- (laughs) -- Steny's not here -- the distinguished chair of the caucus.

And let me just say of Rahm Emanuel: Rahm Emanuel has the most experience on this bill, legislation of any of us in the Congress. As a policy adviser to President Clinton, he negotiated this legislation with a Republican Congress. So this SCHIP legislation has been bipartisan from the start, and we are greatly advantaged by his participation and leadership at this time.

Rahm.

REP. EMANUEL: Thank you, Madame Speaker.

There's been three votes. And when you blow through all the sound and fury and all the smoke, every time we've had a vote, whether it's a vote total or the policy, we've made improvement. Their original bill did not even accept, as the speaker noted, the 61 cents that they just accepted. That's a dramatic improvement this way.

Unfortunately their bill cuts 3 million children from the 10 million goal, one that none of us nor the Republicans who voted for this, nor the Republicans in the Senate or the Democrats in the Senate will deviate from. There will never be a bill that does become law that doesn't do 10 million children and gets 10 million kids health care.

And then we've cut the vote totals in half to the point where we need just 1 percent more to get to what is a veto-proof margin when you look at today's vote total.

So at every step, every time in the last three votes, and the reason we take these steps each time and -- and make these votes happen is because we are getting closer and closer to the goal of getting 10 million kids health care whose parents work full-time, earn a paycheck, not a welfare check, and are doing right by their children. And so we have made progress each step of the way.

Now, we've taken their sincerity that they support children's health care. We believe they take our bipartisan sincerity that it has be 10 million. We took in this process -- and you've heard it throughout the debate, but as you go through this final stage, I think it's important to reiterate, the only thing that was altered in the bill, -- the six points were the points that were in the Judy Biggert letter signed by 38 Republicans. We already had 45 Republicans. The only things that Senator Hatch and Senator Grassley had discussions on -- and they were altered in the core of bill -- were the pieces in their letter. Nothing else. Nothing else -- I mean, Javier has ideas, I have ideas, other people have a lot -- there's 435 people here; there's about 500 ideas out there. The only things altered in this bill was the ideas in their letter.

And in my view, they got a yes on policy and they got polled on the process. But at every step of the way, even on their own legislation, we have made -- taken a step further towards 10 million kids. And as the speaker said, we have continued that conversation because the ultimate goal is we will get the 10 million kids their health care.

Javier.

REP. BECERRA: I'd just like to add that I think what we're seeing here is the building blocks of a successful effort to ultimately get to the goal. No one will deny that we started from the beginning saying we've got to cover at least the 10 million kids. I think this is another bipartisan building block in that process. Will we get there? We think we can.

And this is going to be an interesting process because now we get to take a closer look at what our colleagues on the Republican side are saying they'd really like to see. So we'll get to make that distinction between what they put forward and what we put forward to see if there's a way to come together and get those extra votes.

But clearly, I think what you can say from this vote is that we're no weaker than we were before, and I'd say we're as strong, if not stronger, than we were from the last vote. That's a very good sign, and it means progress is on the way.

SPEAKER PELOSI: If I just may acknowledge the leadership of Congressman Javier Becerra, who is part of the Democratic leadership in the House and a member of the Ways and Means Committee, which is the committee of jurisdiction for this legislation. He's been a champion on the children's health issue, as well. Thank you, Javier.

Any questions?

Q I'm a little flummoxed why you're saying this is a step forward. You've gone from 45 Republicans to 44 Republicans to 43 Republicans. Vern Ehlers switched his vote because he said he thought that you were being too partisan. And I don't understand why you're saying that somehow you've moved forward.

SPEAKER PELOSI: Well, perhaps I can help you with your flummoxed -- flummoxedmanship -- (laughs) -- or is that a state of being. We are very pleased with what happened today. Of course, we would like to have had the 290 votes, but we knew once the excuses started flying that that would not happen.

The fact is, as Mr. -- as the distinguished chair of our caucus has said, the Republicans gave reasons before as to why they couldn't support the bill. They put those reasons in writing, and those reasons were put into the bill. Talked about putting a cap of 300 percent of poverty for a recipient to be eligible for SCHIP. They talked about undocumented people in our country not having access to SCHIP, and that was clarified in the legislation. And it talked about adults receiving the benefit, and that has been accelerated.

They just refuse to take yes for an answer. So the question is, were these reasons why they didn't vote for the bill before, or were they excuses? We'll soon find out as we continue to engage in conversation with them.

That the legislative process is one that is sequential, that there's a great deal of sequencing in it, and we think that the cause has been advanced today, for one reason; they've all gone on record for a 61-cent tax on cigarettes.

Steny's here now.

REP. HOYER: Thank you. Thank you very much, Madame Speaker.

I think it was a good day. I said that when I opened my closing remarks on our side. It was a good day for children because once again, after the veto and the failure to override the veto, we have once again very quickly moved forward our commitment to add 10 million children to health insurance in America.

Actually, it's a net 4 million (children) over those who are now covered. That is a very important step forward. We received 265 votes, which is what we got the first time we passed the bill.

I think on process, there were some, like Mr. Ehlers, who did not vote on substance, who just indicated he did not vote on substance. I think in the final analysis, Mr. Ehlers will vote on substance. The issue is not whether Democrats are good, bad or indifferent; the difference is, is America going to provide for the health care of its children?

The motion to recommit was an interesting motion to recommit. It spent a third less on children's coverage over five years, half as much as -- over 10 -- however, it raised the same amount of money. In other words, what the Republicans did was they adopted the 61 cents tax but only spent a portion of that on children; we spent all of it on children. It raises taxes on tobacco, as I said, but does not invest in the children's coverage. It would cover their motion.

Now, the president's proposal would cover some 840,000 less children. The Republican motion to recommit went in 2.2 million better and would cover 3 million fewer children than the bill that was just passed. It fails to provide positive incentives for states to find and enroll the lowest-income kids. That was their motion to recommit. Their objection was that we didn't have enough low-income kids; in fact, we heard that complaint, that concern -- the chairman apparently has already spoken to that -- and we adjusted our bill to give incentives to add more children, particularly low-income children. We think that was a step forward.

They were concerned about immigrants -- illegal immigrants being added; we addressed that issue. They were concerned about adults without children being added; we addressed that concern. I discussed, as you heard on the floor from Mr. Boehner, with Mr. Boehner and Mr. Blunt; I discussed with the 38 who wrote the letter, we had a meeting. It was, I thought, a good meeting. A number of them thanked me for having the meeting. They thought it was too late and not substantive enough; that was understandable.

I will tell you that we're going to continue to talk to them. We're going to continue to try to work. Why? Because our objective is to include the 10 million children that we have provided for in health insurance in America. Eighty-one percent of America believes that's the policy we ought to pursue, and that is the policy we are pursuing.

Q (Off mike) -- question before, you said -- or you were talking, you said that people voted yes on the policy and no on the process, is that what you said?

REP. EMANUEL: I said -- you could hear what they were saying on the floor. And so I was observing what they said on the floor.

Q You guys control the process, though, right? What is wrong with the process that you're not getting the people to vote yes on the policy?

REP. HOYER: Well -- (laughs) -- we weren't doing anything wrong. We said we're going to bring SCHIP forward soon after the veto. We got a letter from Republicans, 38 Republicans, who did not vote for the bill. You indicate we went down to 43; I haven't looked at the list to see whether they were absent or not. Mr. Ehlers, as you say, changed his vote.

But that aside, we got 265 the first time. We got 265 this time. We haven't lost anything net on that. We think we're going to pick up a number of people on the override at some point in time.

Q (Off mike.)

REP. HOYER: Well, we're going to continue to work on trying to work with those who legitimately want to pass a bill. Cutting by 3 million children is not legitimately wanting to pass this bill.

Mr. Barton indicated that you didn't have consideration. When Mr. Dingell convened to have a markup and the bill -- those of you who covered it know that Mr. Barton pursued delaying tactics ad infinitum. So finally, because the markup was not able to go forward -- i.e., process -- Mr. Dingell concluded the markup. But I think that this is not about process.

There's no child in America, there's no mother in America, no father in America, who is worried about their children having health care who give's a tinker's darn -- even a tinker's damn -- about process. What they care about is substance. What they care about is having their children have access to health care when they get sick. That's what this bill is about.

REP. EMANUEL: What I'll say is just every step of the way -- and I don't mean to do this for a history lesson, but in 1997, when President Clinton introduced the children's health initiative, he had pediatric eye and dental, and they said no to children's health care.

And he said: Well, there will be no balanced budget agreement without it. They finally said only pediatric. President Clinton said no, that won't happen.

And how you created SCHIP was, he demanded and got pediatric eye and dental, the creation of SCHIP, not the expansion of Medicaid -- that same process. And then they came kicking and screaming; we had to drag them to get there. Regardless of how they said they were always for it, they were against it before they were for it.

Let me get to the point. Here they didn't want -- in both Ways and Means and in Energy and Commerce, they had delaying tactics. If you remember, going back to when we had the first vote, they didn't want to have the vote and did the same things, motions to rise. At every step of the way that we have forced this process to move forward, we have improved not only in the vote total but in getting them to recognize pieces of the policy.

And my point is, yes, they -- if you go back, we took, after the last vote -- and everybody reported it that's here -- that -- Heather Wilson wrote about it; members were quoted about it, Tom Davis and others -- that these were minor differences, could be worked out.

So we took their letter, their -- nobody else's, nobody else's comments. We took their comments and used only their comments, and then Senator Grassley and Senator Hatch in a process negotiated with them those agreements. They were in the room. We weren't. And that was what happened.

REP. HOYER: And the letter, by the way, in terms of process, was written to the president of the United States --

REP. EMANUEL: Right.

REP. HOYER: -- not to us. But we got a copy of that letter, and we responded to it, and we worked with them.

Q But you continue to talk past one another --

REP. HOYER: No, no, no.

Q -- and Clinton was the president. That's why he could bargain that way. You're not the president. You have to get two- thirds, and you're not doing very well.

REP. HOYER: We didn't get two-thirds today. We think we're going to move this process forward in the sense that we improve the bill. I think a lot of Republicans, I think -- I didn't hear Rahm say it -- voted on process today. They were annoyed that we met. We were scheduled to meet. They were annoyed that we didn't make more changes. As I told you, what their motion to recommit was -- we have no intention of cutting 3 million children out of health care in America. It's not going to happen.

Q What would have been the cost?

REP. HOYER: The possibility of getting it done and to the present, and to get the process ended.

Q (Off mike) -- you know, you could pick up an extra 20 votes -- (cross talk).

REP. HOYER: Let me tell you, I've met with a lot of Republicans. Not one of them has told me they would vote for this bill, no matter how much time I spent trying to change things, unless -- this is their criteria, in which case, we don't intend to go there.

Q (Off mike) -- continue to talk to them. With an eye towards what? Where in the process do they get an opportunity --

REP. HOYER: Well, the bill's going to go to the Senate. The bill's going to be considered on the Senate floor. Senator Grassley and Senator Hatch have, by the way, spent substantial time talking to members here.

And I hope you heard me say on the floor, this bill is a very substantially compromised bill. We after all passed handily a $90 billion bill through this House. This is a $35 billion bill that a lot of --

Q (Off mike) -- conference ultimately between the Senate and the House?

REP. HOYER: I don't know that there will be a conference, but there is opportunity for increased or additional responses to concerns.

Q (Off mike) -- override vote?

REP. HOYER: Yes.

Q Do you regret having put this bill on the floor? They felt as if they were jammed. And the fact that you guys were talking about if this fails, this next override fails, putting it off until September, only bolster the idea in their mind that this is a political exercise. Do you regret putting them on the floor and leaving that perception?

REP. HOYER: No. We passed the bill with 265 votes, a very substantial majority of the House of Representatives, with substantial numbers of Republicans voting for it notwithstanding the hype about the process, which I think was unjustified. And we are moving the ball forward in a timely fashion. So no, I am not -- I do not regret having done that.

We intend to continue to talk to those Republicans who are interested in moving this child health bill to passage and to law, and to cover those 10 million children. But I want to reiterate, nobody that I've talked to, in this process, has indicated to me, if you do A, B or C, I will vote for the bill at this point in time. I don't want to be strung along for the purposes of delay.

Q (Cross talk) -- what changes do you need to make, do you think, substantively, or in some cases procedurally, in order to get those extra votes?

(Inaudible) -- override?

REP. HOYER: I have no idea. We got a letter from 38 people. Senator Grassley and Senator Hatch, Republicans, met with Republicans, spent very substantial time. Their staffs, Hatch and Grassley's staff, were up till 1:30 in the morning, along with our staffs, 1:30 in the morning two days ago to make the changes that were requested in the letter. Notwithstanding that, they didn't take yes for an answer.

STAFF: Thank you. Thank you.

Q (Off-mike) -- have some kind of bicameral revisions before it goes to the president?

REP. HOYER: Well, the answer is, obviously, that is possible.

Source