Providing for Consideration of H.R. 3963, Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2007

PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 3963, CHILDREN'S HEALTH INSURANCE PROGRAM REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2007 -- (House of Representatives - October 25, 2007)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlelady for yielding, the distinguished Chair of the Rules Committee, and I thank you for bringing this opportunity to the floor where Congress again will have to make a decision about our priorities. The Congress will, I know, in a very strong bipartisan vote, support the children of America because this has always been, as the gentlewoman indicated, a bipartisan initiative.

I first want to acknowledge the distinguished chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee, Mr. Dingell, for his work over the years. I believe his committee had seven hearings on the legislation regarding SCHIP. And the distinguished Chair of the Health Subcommittee, Mr. Pallone, is with us here.

I also want to acknowledge the great work of Charlie Rangel, the Chair of the Ways and Means Committee, who has been such a strong advocate for America's children in every way and, in particular, in this. He, too, had his markups on the bill, which improved the bill; and I want to acknowledge him and his distinguished Chair of the subcommittee, Mr. Stark.

But my highest praise goes to Republicans. Without the Republicans we wouldn't even have SCHIP. Senator Orrin Hatch of Utah really is the father of this initiative. As he tells us, two families in Provo, Utah, visited him in his office. Both of these families have two wage-earners, both of them making minimum wage, trying to support their families of four each. They pled with him that they could not provide health insurance for their children. Because they were working and they were above the poverty line, they did not qualify for Medicaid, and so their hard work was rewarded, not so, by not having health insurance for their children and that was where this all began.

Ten years ago, under a Democratic President, President Clinton, and a Republican Congress, this initiative, SCHIP, State Children's Health Insurance Program, became the law of the land; and God bless that bipartisan effort for making that possible for the health of our children.

So Senator Hatch was very much a part of putting this legislation together, and the gentlemen are right, this is largely a Senate initiative. Senator Grassley, the former Chair of the Finance Committee from Iowa, also a distinguished Republican Member of the United States Senate, has worked harder than anyone to make this the law of the land again, to reauthorize this SCHIP, this children's health initiative, by his intellect, and helped shaping the bill, by his persuasion in talking to Members, including his persuasion of many of us who had a far different bill in mind but agreed to the compromises that he has put forth for the good of the children.

That bill was vetoed. The original bill was vetoed by the President, as we all know. The veto was not overridden. So here we are again with another SCHIP in the image of the bill that received all of the attention before, but improved upon by suggestions made by our colleagues in the minority, our Republican colleagues.

It wasn't that these issues weren't covered in the bill; but the clarity sought by the Republicans, and agreed to by all of us, I think are a definite improvement on the bill, and these fall into three areas.

First, there was the question of the now-famous unlimited amount of wealth that a person could have in order to be able to avail themselves of SCHIP. I hesitate to even repeat the charge because it was so untrue and was known to be untrue, because none of the waivers for such action were ever given by President Bush.

So that factual statement did not exist, but in any event, the fact is now and I thank our Republican colleagues for insisting upon the clarity that says no one making over 300 percent of poverty, no State can allow people to receive the benefits of SCHIP. So there's a cap, a 300 percent of poverty, as to who may receive the benefit.

Secondly, the question of undocumented, those people who are in our country but have not been here that length of time that would qualify. So the undocumented are one category, and the undocumented are not allowed to receive benefits from this initiative. It was clear in the first bill. It's even clearer in the second bill.

So the cap on who can receive it, stronger language as to undocumented, and, third, the issue of adults. Adults were in the program because people thought as a lure to families they could get children in the program. Republicans objected to that. There was an exaggeration of the number of adults who are in the program; but, nonetheless, in the interests of the children the new legislation contains a provision that adults, under one circumstance, will be phased out in 2 years and, in another circumstance, in 1 year, so that it's a faster, faster removal of adults from the system.

As a mother of five, though, I have to insist that Governors still be allowed to provide health care to pregnant women because we cannot talk about the health of our children, especially getting one out to the earliest, healthiest start, unless we talk about the health of pregnant women.

So, again, three areas: the cap, 300 percent; no illegal aliens, to use your term, I prefer undocumented, are able to get benefits; and adults are phased out of the program. The adults were only in the program because the Bush administration gave the waiver to enable them to be in the program; but, nonetheless, that is now out of the question.

So we have this opportunity, once again, for this Congress to speak and vote in support of children. This is so important. It's a very positive day for me because when people ask me what are the three most important issues facing the Congress, I always say the same thing--our children, our children, our children: their health, the education, the economic security of their families, a safe and healthy environment in which they can thrive, and a world at peace in which they can reach their fulfillment.

And on every one of those scores, this Congress has acted in a strong bipartisan way on behalf of the children. The health, we're talking about today. The education, this Congress in a strong bipartisan way passed the biggest package for college affordability since the GI Bill of Rights was signed by Franklin Roosevelt in 1944, over 60 years ago, and this Congress said we are standing with the children in terms of expanding their opportunity.

The health today, the education and many other educational initiatives. I point that one out because it's a start. The economic security of their families, this Congress voted in a very strong bipartisan way to raise the minimum wage, the first time it was raised in 10 years, and with a strong bipartisan vote.

Also, in a very strong bipartisan vote, we voted for the Innovation Agenda, the COMPETES Act, our commitment to competitiveness to keep America number one, keep good-paying jobs and businesses in the United States, helping the economic security of our families.

And then the environment in which they live, again in a strong bipartisan way, we passed legislation to make the air they breathe, the water they drink cleaner. All of this was done, again strong bipartisan votes, highest ethical standard, no new deficit spending, all of it so that none of the advantages that we were conveying to children would be accompanied with a bill heaping mountains of debt onto them into the future.

Part of that also was to operate in the most honest and open way. In a strong bipartisan way, we passed our ethics reform bill so that we are here for the children's interest and not special interests.

So this Congress this year has had a strong bipartisan record in support of our children, and I thank both the Republicans and the Democrats for supporting those initiatives. Almost all of that except this SCHIP has been signed into law by the President of the United States.

Some mention has been made about the fact that there is a fire in California, and as one who has had the privilege of representing the great Golden State of California for 20 years in the Congress, one who understands we had an earthquake in San Francisco, an earthquake in Los Angeles and now these disastrous fires, we all understand how important it is for Members to be at home with their constituents at a time of a natural disaster, a time of tragedy. But that doesn't mean we don't continue with the work of government.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source