Increase Sources Of Energy

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. FOXX. Well, I thank you, Dr. Price, for beginning this hour and bringing an extraordinarily comprehensive and cogent discussion to the health care issue. I did hear more of our colleagues who were here in the previous hour talking about energy than health care. But I did hear them say if we were to adopt the health care proposals--and I assume that they mean H.R. 3200--that that would bring long-term economic growth to this country. And I thought that I must be living in either Never-Never Land or Wonderland or someplace other than in the United States of America and serving in the United States Congress, because having the government take over health care in this country is a formula, in my opinion, for harming economic growth in this country, not creating economic growth. I think that the American people have caught on to that.

I want to say that the thing that kept running through my mind as I was listening to them--and let me say here that many folks wonder why we often are here speaking to an empty Chamber. But we're usually in our offices, listening to what's going on in the Chamber, along with about 800,000 other people in the country. So we do listen to each other, and sometimes it is very frustrating to hear what's being said, because I believe, in many cases, the American people are being misled by the comments that are being said. We don't expect to see long-term economic growth from health care. One of the best things, I think, that has happened this entire summer is that the American people have been paying closer attention to what's being proposed in the Congress.

H.R. 3200 has been looked at by the public, and they understand that what we have been saying about the bill is more accurate than what our colleagues have been saying about the bill. I have read the bill. I know you have read the bill, and I want to encourage more and more Americans to read it because I don't think that the time has passed for our considering that bill. I think that, or something similar to it, is going to be dealt with on the floor of the House.

But what I wish is that more Americans had paid closer attention to the bill that our colleagues call cap-and-trade, and which we call cap-and-tax, because I think if the American people had paid as much attention to that as they have to the health care bill, they would have been up in arms earlier this year. Most of them don't realize that, again, what our colleagues were saying is just the opposite of what they do in legislation.

Last summer we were here talking about the problems with energy. Gas prices were skyrocketing. And as you pointed out, we stood for an all-of-the-above energy policy in this country. We want to be able to use the resources that are available to us in this country. I believe the Good Lord gave us the resources in this country to take care of our energy needs. But our colleagues on the other side of the aisle--and let's say it--the Democrats are in control of this Congress. It's very important that people understand that our colleagues who were speaking a while ago were speaking of the folks in charge who are of their party. They make it seem like they're not in control, that they can't make the things happen that they're talking about. But they are in control. Every day they make us more and more dependent on that foreign oil that they say they don't want us to be dependent on.

We have seen here how they have shut down accessibility to shale and oil and the Outer Continental Shelf. Over and over and over again, they stymie every opportunity that we have to increase the sources of energy in this country.

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Will the gentlelady yield?

Ms. FOXX. Absolutely.

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. I appreciate those comments because I was stunned as I was sitting here, listening to the gentleman from Ohio say--and I wrote it down just because I was so astounded--say that we ought to increase our use of ``coal, nuclear and oil shale.'' He said that, and in fact, that is exactly the opposite thing that his party has done; isn't that the truth?

Ms. FOXX. It is absolutely the truth. In fact, in the cap-and-trade bill, that they call it--we call it cap-and-tax--what it will do is it will make us more dependent. It stops the use of coal in this country. We have much more coal resources available to us than Saudi Arabia has oil resources, and we know that. But they seem to hate coal and want to do everything that they possibly can to diminish the use of it.

There are no plans for creating nuclear energy, increased nuclear energy. Yet we know if we're going to maintain our standard of living in this country, we need to be building in the next 30 years 30 to 50 nuclear power plants. We also know that since World War II, France has gotten 85 percent of their electricity from nuclear power, and they have never had one tiny problem as a result of that. But the radical environmentalists in this country seem determined to create blackouts in this country. They don't want coal. They don't want us to drill for oil. They don't want nuclear. They're even protesting now putting in solar panels out in the Mojave Desert. They don't want wind farms.

Solar and wind are not the solutions to our energy needs, and we know that. President Obama said he would double the use of alternative energies, meaning wind and solar, and yet President Bush did that in the last 18 months of his administration. We went from 1.5 percent to 3 percent. Well, President Bush did that in 18 months. President Obama has said that he would double it during his first term. Well, going from 3 percent to 6 percent, given how the technology is growing, isn't a very big leap.

But we also know that we can only absorb in our current electric grid only 10 percent of solar and wind. Beyond 10 percent we put our wonderful system of energy in great jeopardy because we simply don't have the grid to handle it, and we can handle up to 10 percent, as I understand it from listening to the experts. But even that, for us to absorb 10 percent of wind and solar, which are undependable, and that's the main reason we can't absorb more than 10 percent, would take $3 trillion to redo our grid. They never say anything about that cost. And to be able to put in cap-and-tax would be enormously expensive to the average American consumer. We know that it's probably going to increase energy costs between $1,700 and $3,000 for the average American family. They never mention that when they're talking about what they want to do in terms of alternative energy.

I think it's very important, again, that we call the attention of the American people to that bill. I'm sorry I forgot to write down the number of the bill, but if people, again, would pay some attention to that bill and read it, as they have H.R. 3200, I think they'd find that we are telling the truth about it and that rather than expanding domestic energy sources, it's going to contract domestic energy sources because of all the rules and regulations and the costs of them. I think it's a cruel hoax being put out to the American people along with what they have been saying about health care also.

I want to switch back to that subject because you are an expert in both of these areas, but you're really such an expert in the health care area. I want to take it down, though, to, I think, a conversation that everybody can understand.

When I was growing up in western North Carolina in the 1950s, my family was extraordinarily poor. I mean dirt poor, as we used to say. And yet we could afford health care. I had chronic asthma and allergies and often had to get health care treatment, and my family could pay for that. The costs were very low. And I began to think a few years ago, now, what has happened since I was a child living out in the country, a very rural area, the poorest county in North Carolina, and yet we had a small hospital, we had doctors there who would treat us, and we could pay cash and meet our obligations? What has happened since that time in the mid 1960s Medicare was created, Medicaid was created? Government policies encouraged companies to provide health insurance for their employees because they could tax deduct it but individuals could not. So the rules changed dramatically.

I know also that we have wonderful technology. We have many, many more specialists in our country, and our health care has gotten better and better in this country. And I get really furious when I hear these statistics from our colleagues that want to say that we are 35th in the level of health care that we provide. Well, why is it that everybody comes to our country to get health care and why is it that our average lifespan is now 80 years old and people are living such vibrant lives right up almost until death, most people are? It's because we have created government-run health care in Medicare and Medicaid and in the other areas that you talked about and third-party payer. We have taken away the sense of responsibility from Americans for how much things cost. And everybody thinks, well, if insurance is going to pay for it, it's not costing me anything. I'll utilize it to the full.

But I make the analogy we all have to buy car insurance because as we drive our cars, there is the chance we will harm someone else, so we all have to have liability insurance. But our car insurance does not pay to change our oil or put new tires on the car, and yet we have come to accept that.

The same thing with homeowner's insurance. We buy homeowner's insurance because it's the practical thing to do. But if our roof gets a leak in it, we don't turn that in to the insurance company. We fix the roof because we know if we don't fix the roof, pretty soon the ceiling is going to be leaking, then the floor is going to be damaged.

So we assume that responsibility for our cars and our homes, and yet over the years, this insidious growth of government and third-party payer through insurance have taken away the sense of responsibility that we have for taking care of our own bodies and taking care of our own health. And the more we involve the government, the worse it's going to be. We don't need government-run health care in this country. We need to follow the principles that you outlined, and I think you did a beautiful job.

The other thing I want to say is we keep hearing that Republicans have no alternatives. Our alternatives fit exactly the principles that you outlined, and I just want to mention a couple of bills here.

H.R. 2520, the Patient's Choice Act by Mr. Ryan from Wisconsin. The Patient's Choice Act would transform health care in America by strengthening the relationship between the patient and the doctor by using the forces of choice and competition rather than rationing and restrictions. It seeks to ensure universal affordable health care for all Americans.

And then there's the bill that you introduced, which you, I don't think, have spoken of, but it's H.R. 3400, and we want to make sure people understand the difference: The Empowering Patients First Act to increase patients' control over their health care decisions by offering more choices and the highest quality available.

We have comprehensive bills out there that do what needs to be done, but the Speaker refuses to pay attention to those, as you said, and the President refuses to pay attention to them. They are determined to control every aspect of our lives, and taking over health care gives them the wonderful opportunity to do that.

I want to thank you again for leading this hour tonight and getting us on the right track on these issues.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. FOXX. Well, I thought that it might be useful to throw out a few other statistics tonight. I haven't had a chance to read this entire article, but the Weekly Standard, September 21, has an interesting article in it by Fred Barnes, entitled ``An Unnecessary Operation.'' It has some very interesting statistics in it, some of which we have talked about before. I think it's important to point out, he says here in this article, that 89 percent of Americans, in a June 2008 ABC News-USA Today-Kaiser Family Foundation survey, said they were satisfied with their health care.

Most Americans think that we're trying to do too much in our government. One area that they're very happy with is their health care, and I think that it's important that we point that out.

As you say, there are things that do need to be done. There is no question. Republicans understand we need to make modifications in people's accessibility to health care, in its portability--those principles that you laid out earlier. We want to do that, and we have ways to do that, as you say, without it costing a dime to the American people. That's what we should be focusing on. With 89 percent of Americans being satisfied with their health care, let us make minor adjustments to the health care system.

Let me point out some other statistics that, I think, are very, very important. These go against those people who decry what an awful health care system we have in this country, which really infuriates me because, again, we know that people are coming here--thousands of them. In here, I think they say 400,000 people a year come from other countries to get medical care. Let's talk a little bit about those.

The two very major innovations in health care are the MRI and the CT. The statistics on this are absolutely astounding in terms of the numbers of machines. The United States has 27 MRI machines per million Americans. Canada and Britain have 6 per million. We have 27. The United States has 34 CT scanners per million. Canada has 12 per million. Britain has 8 per million.

Now, we know just on the face of it, with that many fewer machines, it's going to take a lot longer to have access to those machines. Right now, American patients pay out-of-pocket expenses of 12.6 percent. It's much higher in other countries, including the countries that have government-run health care.

Then we can talk a little bit about mortality. I mean, again, you've laid out the arguments for why we should make the kinds of changes you've recommended and that Republicans have recommended, but let's talk a little bit about survival rates:

For all cancer, 66.3 percent of American men and 63.9 percent of American women survive. In Europe, it's only 47.3 percent of men and 55.8 percent of women who survive after 5 years. These are statistically significant numbers. Let's talk about breast cancer. There is a 90.1 percent survival rate for Americans and a 79 percent survival rate for Europeans. I mean, not only do we have the least expensive health care in this country and the most available health care in this country, but we also have much, much greater survival rates in this country.

Why do we want to mess up that system by implementing what Speaker Pelosi and President Obama have recommended? That is simply going to go against the

Hippocratic oath.

I was thinking about that earlier. I know physicians say, above all else, they should do no harm. You know, I really think that that needs to be added to our oath when we come here and swear our allegiance to the Constitution. I think it's entirely appropriate for us to do that, but I really think we should add something like the Hippocratic oath, which says to do no harm, because what the Democrats want to do, who are in charge of this government right now--of the Congress as well as of the executive branch--is to actually bring harm to the American people. They will be violating all of those principles which you laid out earlier, and we're going to be reducing life spans and survival rates if we go to a government-run plan. It's unnecessary except that it is part of the philosophy of the liberal Left.

Their idea is that the government knows best. For those of us who are conservatives and who are mostly Republicans, our idea is that it's not the government that knows best. We should leave people as free as possible, and we should operate as we have for over 200 years in our society and in our country, which is with a capitalistic operation. We have a Judeo-Christian bedrock. Our rule of law and our capitalistic system have allowed us to have the most successful society that has ever existed in the world.

Yet these folks want the government to take over. They want the government to run automobile companies and to become banks for student loans. Everything should be run by the government, in their minds, while we say let's perfect the situations that we have. We can certainly improve what we do in almost every area, and we should focus on those things instead of turning upside down and reversing the things that we do well.

So I want to thank you very much for leading this hour and for focusing on these two issues, energy and health care, which are so important to Americans, and for helping to set straight some of the things that our colleagues said, particularly in the previous hour, but they're things which they say almost every day. Let's call them to task on those issues.

Thank you, Dr. Price, Congressman Price, for the leadership you've given to the RSC and particularly to this issue of health care.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source