Providing for Consideration of H.R. 2576, Modifying Income Calculation for Health Care Programs, and Providing for Consideration of H.R. 674, 3% Withholding Repeal and Job Creation Act

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, here we go again. Another day in the House of Representatives, another day without a jobs bill. As a Red Sox fan, I'm not prone to quoting Yogi Berra--but this is déja 2 vu all over again.

This Tea Party-run Republican House is not only breaking House rules to move a bipartisan bill--something they said they would never do--but they are breaking these rules to protect big oil while taking healthcare away from low-income Americans.

Talk about hitting the trifecta.

Let's start with the rule. We have one rule for two bills, one bill repealing the 3% withholding requirement and another bill offsetting the costs of the first bill. Why have two bills come up under one rule? The only reason is because the Republicans want to shut down debate and limit the motion to recommit. That's why the rule combines these two bills into one bill after they are approved on their own.

This is just one more example of this Republican leadership's continual streak of broken promises.

If this weren't bad enough, this rule waives all points of order--including the Budget Act. Why is this necessary? Well, that's because the 3% withholding bill violates the Budget Act twice.

The sad truth is that the Chairman of the Subcommittee on Health, the gentleman from California Mr. Herger, didn't even know that his bill violated the Budget Act when he testified before the Rules Committee yesterday.

Chairman Dreier, of course, tried to explain these violations but he was misinformed when he said the only reason for these violations was because the Senate did not pass a budget resolution. To correct the record, that's only one of the violations. The other violation is because this bill violates the House-passed budget resolution. I'm not one to defend the Ryan budget, but I'd like to think that the Republicans wouldn't use one bill to contradict legislation they passed earlier this year.

And the Republican offset for the 3% withholding bill is a bad one--it tightens Medicaid and health insurance exchange subsidy eligibility requirements. In other words, it prevents low-income individuals and families from being eligible for Medicaid, an egregious act during normal times but especially heartless in this difficult economy.

Talk about turning a deaf ear to people who are struggling to make ends meet.

Now, Democrats offered an amendment to replace the bad Republican offset by eliminating subsidies to big oil and gas companies. BP, for example, reported profits of $4.9 billion in the third quarter of this year even though their production decreased by 12 percent over that period. They made more money with less oil and we--the American people--still provide lucrative subsidies to them.

Time after time, the Rules Committee has blocked my amendment ending the subsidy--siding with big oil and defending their subsidy--using procedural excuses.

It's funny how the Republicans waive the rules when it's convenient for their agenda but they refuse to apply that same standard to all bills. In this case, Republicans waive all points of order against the underlying bills but cite germaneness and cut-go as reasons why they're not making the Democratic substitute in order.

The truth is Republicans are hiding behind this flimsy excuse to protect big oil.

To my Republican friends, let me set the record straight. You're making in order a non-germane bill to pay for the repeal of the 3 percent withholding bill--a bill that violates the Budget Act--but you're saying an amendment ending subsidies for oil companies making billions of dollars each month can't be made in order because it's not germane?

You're making in order a bill that violates the rules of the House--and you're protecting this bill from these points of order--but you won't do the same for our proposal?

It's truly outrageous that you're making two bills in order and using the rule to combine these two bills into one; that you're going out of your way to make in order your non-germane bill and you're not doing the same for our bill.

It's truly outrageous that you're more interested in rationing healthcare for those who need it instead of ending subsidies for oil companies who continue to rake in billions of dollars of profits each quarter; and that you're hiding behind procedural excuses in order to get your way.

Mr. Speaker, this is a process even Tom DeLay would marvel at.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source