Providing for Consideration of H.R. 6, 21st Century Cures Act

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. I want to thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Burgess) for yielding me the customary 30 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, before I speak on this bill, I want to thank Leader Pelosi for leading today's efforts to hold House Republicans accountable for their divisive Confederate flag amendment.

You know, it is stunning to me that my Republican friends decided to refer the minority leader's resolution to committee so we could not have a debate.

The legislature in South Carolina could have a debate, but my Republican friends here in the House of Representatives ensured that we in Congress cannot have that debate.

And the fact is that Americans, I think, are ready to leave behind the discrimination and hate symbolized by the Confederate flag, but my friends on the other side of the aisle seem to have a different idea.

Last night House Republicans introduced an amendment to the Interior Appropriations bill that simply has no place on this House floor.

It would undo the successful Democratic amendment adopted by voice that would have barred the display of Confederate flags in Federal cemeteries and barred the National Park Service from doing business with gift shops that sell Confederate flag merchandise.

Simply put, while South Carolina voted this week to take the Confederate flag down, Republicans in Congress were ready to put it back up.

And even more troubling, House Republicans tried to sneak this amendment into the bill late last night, hoping that nobody would notice. We noticed. The American people noticed.

And I am ashamed that, in 2015, Congress would even consider a measure that seeks to perpetuate the hate and racism that the Confederate flag represents.

Now, my friends on the other side of the aisle, especially the leadership, seem to be in a little bit of disarray.

The Speaker of the House is trying to distance himself from the measure, notwithstanding that the Republican chairman of the House Appropriations Interior Subcommittee who offered the amendment said that he did so at the request of the Republican leadership.

The Confederate flag is a symbol of racism and a reminder of one of our Nation's darkest periods of division. It has no place in America's National Parks. Congress should not promote this symbol of hate.

And now is the time to come together. I am proud to join with my colleagues who are standing up today for all Americans united against hate.

I will be asking my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the previous question so that we can bring up the Pelosi resolution before all of us here and have that debate and have that vote. I hope my Republican friends will join with me.

I just want to say one final thing. The fact that the Interior Appropriations bill was pulled from consideration on this House floor by my Republican friends because they believed that, without this pro-Confederate flag amendment, that they could lose up to 100 of their own Members, is stunning to me.

It never ceases to amaze me. Just when I think that this institution can't sink any lower, then something like this happens.

So, Mr. Speaker, I would urge my colleagues to stand with me and vote against the previous question so we can actually have this debate, a debate I think the American people would want us to have.

Now, Mr. Speaker, on the underlying bill before us, H.R. 6, the 21st Century Cures Act, I just want to say that this is the product of bipartisan hearings, stakeholder meetings, drafts and redrafts.

I am proud to be a cosponsor of the version of H.R. 6 that was passed by the Energy and Commerce Committee by a vote of 51-0. A vote like that doesn't happen often, especially in this Congress.

I want to commend Chairman Upton and Congresswoman DeGette for leading this initiative and tirelessly working to get H.R. 6 to the floor.

I think it represents the kind of investments that we should be making to help families stay healthy and to grow our economy.

It provides $8.75 billion in mandatory funding over the next 5 years to the National Institutes of Health to spur scientific innovation and discovery by the country's premier medical researchers and scientists.

During the Clinton administration, Congress doubled the NIH budget and made a real commitment to keeping

America on the front lines of scientific research. That investment led to exponential advances in medicine.

We should continue that progress by once again giving NIH the resources they need to make new advances in medicine. We shouldn't let our politics limit our ambition.

As Members of Congress, we were elected to be leaders, and this is an opportunity to ensure America continues to lead the way on new breakthroughs in health.

Now, I would have preferred to see the original $10 billion in NIH funding that was included in the bill that passed out of the Energy and Commerce Committee, and I hope that we can increase NIH funding back to that level as the bill moves forward.

We know without a shadow of a doubt that basic medical research produces results. In fact, NIH-funded research at institutions like the University of Massachusetts Medical School in my hometown of Worcester has been the single greatest contributor to advances in health in human history.

Today the average American lives 6 years longer than in the 1970s largely because of pioneering NIH investments.

All across the country, NIH-supported researchers are forging a path toward treatment and cures for debilitating diseases that impact patients everywhere.

But their success depends upon us. Our decision to invest in NIH is imperative to their success in improving health for all Americans.

Just consider UMASS Medical School as one example. For years, UMASS has been in the forefront of medical innovation because of investments from NIH.

In 2006, Dr. Craig Mello received the Nobel Prize in medicine for his groundbreaking discovery of RNA silencing, which, in layman's terms, means shutting off bad cells.

UMASS has researchers working toward finding cures for AIDS, Down's Syndrome, and Lou Gehrig's disease. All of this is possible because of our investment in NIH.

But I hear over and over again from scientists and medical researchers that they worry about the uncertainty of NIH funding because of crazy things that we do, like sequestration. They worry about our commitment to advancing basic medical research.

Fewer and fewer research grants are being funded. Countries like China, India, and even Singapore are luring away the best and brightest American researchers because they are committing to making meaningful investments in medical research.

21st Century Cures helps to reverse that trend, but I worry it is not enough. I am pleased to see that H.R. 6 takes a number of steps to modernize clinical trials, improve how the Food and Drug Administration approves new drugs and devices, and encourages the development of next generation treatments through the use of precision medicine, which President Obama highlighted in his State of the Union speech.

Just last week we saw the approval of a major new drug that will improve the quality of life for more than 10,000 people living with cystic fibrosis. The investments included in 21st Century Cures will help us to make more of these kinds of groundbreaking advances a reality.

Mr. Speaker, for all of the bipartisanship and positive aspects of this bill, I would be remiss if I didn't point out one glaring inconsistency.

Despite numerous hearings, round tables, and forms on this bill, a controversial policy rider that restricts access to abortion was added to the bill that came before the Rules Committee.

It is like the majority couldn't help themselves. They couldn't resist an opportunity to add a contentious rider to an otherwise bipartisan package to advance medical research.

I am pleased that the committee made in order an amendment offered by my friends Barbara Lee, Jan Schakowsky, and Yvette Clarke to strike these controversial policy riders.

Unfortunately, the committee prohibited a number of other amendments from coming to the floor for debate. Out of the 36 amendments submitted for consideration, only eight will be considered on this floor during debate on this legislation.

Many of our colleagues came to the Rules Committee last night to testify on their amendments. They raised important issues and made suggestions as to how we can improve this legislation.

So while I support the underlying bill, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the rule, which prohibits debate on a number of amendments worthy of consideration.

I reserve the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I am going to urge that we defeat the previous question. If we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to the rule to allow for consideration of Leader Pelosi's resolution, which basically says that any State flag containing the Confederate battle flag would be prohibited from the House wing of the Capitol.

Given what the Republicans, our leadership, tried to do on the Interior Appropriations bill yesterday, I think this is especially timely. As I mentioned earlier, while South Carolina voted this week to take the Confederate flag down, Republicans in Congress appear ready to put it back up.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Lewis), the distinguished ranking member of the Ways and Means Subcommittee on Oversight.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time to close.

Mr. Speaker, the 21st Century Cures bill is a good bill. I want to thank Mr. Upton and Ms. DeGette for working in a bipartisan way to come up with this product. It invests in NIH. It invests in lifesaving medical research. It makes it more possible that we will find cures to diseases like cancers and Alzheimer's and Parkinson's, diabetes, HIV, and so many other terrible diseases that afflict so many of our fellow citizens.

This is important stuff. Who knows, maybe we will even find a cure to the disease that resulted in so many in this House voting for the destructive sequestration initiative that, by the way, cut medical research and put off the day of some of these lifesaving cures. We need to do better than this, but this is an important start, an important step in the right direction, and I hope that my colleagues in a bipartisan way will support it.

Secondly, as I mentioned before, I want to urge my colleagues to vote against the previous question.

I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of the amendment I would offer in the Record if we defeat the previous question, Mr. Speaker.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Massachusetts?

There was no objection.

Mr. McGOVERN. If we defeat the previous question, we will bring up again the Pelosi resolution that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle chose not to debate. The reason why this is important, the reason why we should do this is very simple: because it is the right thing to do. Every once in awhile we ought to come together in this Chamber and do the right thing. The Confederate flag is a symbol of hate; it is a symbol of division; it is a symbol of so many things that we all abhor. The time has come to follow some of the other States in this country and here in Congress do something the American people can be proud of.

I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' and defeat the previous question. Vote ``no'' on the rule because it is restrictive.

I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source