Bruce Braley

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Matthew Wicks for being a first prize winner of C-SPAN's Student Cam competition. Matthew created a fantastic video entitled ``After the Storm'' which details the tragedy of one of the worst tornadoes in Iowa history. On May 25, 2008, the community of Parkersburg, Iowa was hit by an EF-5 tornado with winds of over 200 mph. This tornado destroyed the Parkersburg community. Matthew's video highlights the successes and challenges faced by the Aplington Parkersburg community as they worked with the federal government to obtain disaster relief funding. Matthew did an excellent job of detailing the struggles of the Parkersburg community while seeking disaster funding. While the community did receive disaster relief funding, there are many challenges they still face today as they continue to work with FEMA. Matthew's video illustrates the struggles that so many communities face when dealing with the aftermath of a natural disaster. I'm proud to have Matthew as one of my constituents and I congratulate him on his success. I wish him the best in his future endeavors.

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Sara Gabrielle, Jarek Bakken, and Daniel Yehieli, second prize winners of C- SPAN's Student Cam competition. Sara, Jarek and Daniel created a fantastic video entitled ``The Price Tag of the American Dream'' which details the challenges of paying for college. Sara, Jarek and Daniel do an excellent job of highlighting the struggles that so many college students face today. Rising costs have limited access to an affordable higher education for many potential college students. I was pleased to see that this video explains many of the new benefits available to students as a result of the recent student loan law. Pell grants, college tax credits and the income-based repayment plan will be valuable tools that will make college more affordable for millions of Americans. Sara, Jarek and Daniel's video illustrates both the challenges that many college students face today as well as the tools that are available to make college more affordable. I'm proud to represent Sara, Jarek and Daniel in Congress and wish them the best in their future endeavors.

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. I thank the gentleman for yielding. If you remember only one thing about this bill, remember this: It is a solution in search of a problem. The simple truth is that there are no taxpayer dollars being used to pay for abortions. None. Zero. Nada. Don't be fooled by this bill. It isn't about funding. It is about preventing women from being able to access comprehensive health care. That is what this bill is about. The debate is about whether politicians sitting in Congress should dictate the personal, private medical decisions of the American people. It aims to impose intrusive government rules on personal medical decisions. The bill's supporters don't want abortion, any abortion, to be legal in the United States, and so they are adding as many bureaucratic rules as they can come up with. This bill would not allow an exception for rape and incest for women in the military and military dependents. Think about that. Military studies in news reports suggest that the sexual assault in the military is unconscionably high. CBS News reported that one in three military women experience sexual assault during their career in the service. One in three. This is outrageous. And yet under this bill, those brave women who took an oath to defend and support the Constitution of this country and put their lives on the line every day, if they are sexually assaulted by a peer and become pregnant, would not have an opportunity to get an abortion under this rule. That's what we're talking about today. And that is the contrast between these two philosophies of the role of government and the personal-private medical decisions of women. And that is why I ask my colleagues to reject this bill.

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I submit this statement on behalf of Albert Caswell, in honor of Father Dan Coughlin. A Man of Grace A A man . . . A man of grace . . . Our Lord, upon this place . . . Had so placed . . . As a true reflection of his face . . . All in this temple of democracy's faith . . . This shrine our forefathers had so embraced . . . For America was founded on such faith . . . For no other experiment has since so been raised . . . For Father Dan, you were a pioneer . . . As America's first Catholic Chaplin so here . . . To so spread the word, upon each and every morning heard . . . To counsel and to inspire . . . Lifting hearts higher . . . All for our nation's leaders, you never tired . . . As an instrument of our Lord's heart . . . Oh how your faith, has so done its part . . . To bring a Congress through such storms and the dark . . . All but with, the light of your fine heart . . . And our Lord's word, casting out the dark . . . And Father we will miss your kind warm face . . . And your inspiring call to God, on each new day . . . And your warm heart, filled with such grace . . . Forever, in our hearts you shall hold a place . . . For your blessings bestowed upon us all . . . Answering our Lord's, call to faith . . . For such people, Heaven so holds a place . . . For such men of grace . . . In honor of Father Dan, and all of the hearts you have touched over the years . . . Bless you--Albert Carey Caswell.

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the outstanding accomplishments of Dubuque business owners Gina L. Blean and Kelly A. Heysinger for winning the Small Business Administration's (SBA's) Iowa ``Small Business Person of the Year'' award. Gina and Kelly are co-owners of Unified Therapy Services, Inc. in Dubuque, Iowa. Small businesses are the driving force behind our economy and I couldn't be prouder of this one. This prestigious award is only bestowed upon the nation's top entrepreneurs--and I'm glad to see the entrepreneurial spirit flourishing in eastern Iowa. We must continue to promote our small businesses and make sure that they can thrive and create new jobs. In May, the SBA will honor Gina, Kelly, and other winners from across the country in Washington, DC, during National Small Business Week. The SBA will also select the ``National Small Business Person of the Year'' from the state ``Small Business Persons of the Year.'' I will be rooting for them to win this prestigious national award.

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I offer this on behalf of my colleague, Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, and her constituents in Arizona's 8th congressional district. This year, more than 10 billion laboratory tests are being performed--tests that are important to the health and, often, the very lives of our family members, our friends, and ourselves. Thirteen percent of the U.S. population is already over the age of 65 and every seven seconds one of us turns 50. Combine these facts with the steadily lengthening life expectancy of the average American, and today's emphasis on preventive medicine and early detection of disease conditions. The result is an exponentially growing, almost overwhelming demand for medical laboratory services across the nation. The American Society for Clinical Pathology advises that among the highly trained and dedicated professionals who work in medical laboratories are histotechnologists, histologic technicians, pathologists, medical technologists, cytotechnologists, medical laboratory technicians, and phlebotomists who engage in life-saving work every day. Given the critical nature of their work, laboratory professionals require state-of-the-art technological support. Take, for example, the preparation of microscope slides for biopsies. Three hundred million tissue slides--most of them key to detecting cancer--are processed in U.S. histology labs each year. Actively working to eliminate patient identification errors and cross-contamination, the nation's top lab professionals have replaced outdated labeling and slide preparation processes with smart solutions--fully automated, integrated individual slide staining systems and workflow management platforms that offer confidence in their ability to deliver the right patient results. I am proud to note that the leading global provider of such patient- focused, tissue-based cancer diagnostics is Ventana Medical Systems, Inc., headquartered in southern Arizona's eighth congressional district. Their mantra underscores the mission of every medical laboratory: deliver the right patient results in a timely manner. With the approach of National Medical Laboratory Professionals Week (April 24-30), I join Ventana's 1,300 employees in saluting our nation's medical laboratorians. Their dedication, professionalism and hard work, combined with state-of-the-art technology, are essential to prolonging the healthy lives of millions.

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to the Managers Amendment, because this amendment is an unprecedented attack on states. The amendment gives complete federal government control over air travel safety, by radically reducing a state's ability to protect its own citizens. Passengers, crew, ground workers, and others have no recourse under state law, under this amendment. For those concerned about an expansion of the federal government over ordinary activities of American citizens--this is it. In fact, the amendment gives broad immunity to an entire industry, severely limiting every Americans' freedoms under the 7th amendment. The 7th amendment is intended as a check on potential abuse of power by the government. This amendment injects the government into courthouses and into juries. Blanket immunity to an entire industry is simply unprecedented. Here's what this means: If you or your family gets injured or even killed in an airline accident, and it's even clear that airline safety professionals were completely negligent in their safety preparations, you have no recourse. In that situation, following events even as tragic as plane crashes, the United States Government simply leaves you and your family behind, contrary to your 7th Amendment rights under the Constitution. This type of immunity is completely inappropriate for crashes caused by the negligence of those charged with maintaining safety. I believe that we should be working to improve air safety, not weaken it. We should fight to do whatever we can for families who face the terrible tragedy of plane crashes, not abandoning them. I oppose this amendment, because I stand with American travelers and American families, and I urge my colleagues to vote against this attack on the 7th Amendment to the Constitution.

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 1076, a bill to prohibit federal funding of National Public Radio and the use of federal funds to acquire radio content. Our constituents sent us to Congress to address the economy and jobs, and to date we've only considered legislation to cut jobs and cut investment in our local communities. CBO projects this bill will have $0 impact on the deficit, and this bill represents nothing more than an attack on news and programming that is valuable to 34 million Americans, and a further attack on American jobs. National Public Radio programming provides a breath of ``Fresh Air'' in a toxic media environment, and this bill would threaten the ability of Iowa Public Radio in my home state to continue to provide access to that content. By prohibiting funding use on national programming, Iowa Public Radio expects to see a reduction in corporate underwriting and other fundraising, fundamentally impacting their ability to operate. I'm proud to be a long time listener of Iowa Public Radio. This Iowa treasure provides access to valuable national content like Morning Edition, All Things Considered, Prairie Home Companion and Car Talk, and local programming like The Exchange covering current events and news from across the political spectrum, and programs that highlight the arts in Iowa communities like Orchestra Iowa in Cedar Falls. This bill would jeopardize this valuable source of non-partisan news and entertainment to fulfill a political vendetta. ``All Things considered,'' Mr. Speaker, we need to address the deficit, but this bill does nothing to solve our problems. The CBO projects this bill will save the taxpayers nothing, and threatens 9000 jobs across the country. I know National Public Radio is a constant companion in my home, just as it is across the nation, and I have heard loud and clear from my constituents, do not cut funding for NPR.

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. I am in its current form.

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, this picture tells the story of why this amendment is so important. This isn't Wall Street. You don't see any hedge fund managers or investment bankers here. They are doing pretty well these days. This isn't the headquarters of BP. Most small towns are lucky to have a single convenience store, and they are even luckier if that convenience store sells gasoline. This is a Main Street in my State of Iowa, and there are far too many of these in communities in my State and in my district. And I guarantee you, there are far too many of these in rural communities in your States. Because while Wall Street and big corporations are doing fine, our rural communities and small towns are facing a real crisis, and the Neighborhood Stabilization Program is making a real difference in rural America. I want to tell you about a woman from Oelwein, a small town in my district. She is 23 years old. She only makes $22,000 a year working at a day care. She grew up in Oelwein and she wants to raise her children in Oelwein, and the national Neighborhood Stabilization Program is helping her become a first-time homeowner. Now, our amendment would simply take the money that has already been allocated for this program and prioritize it for our rural communities so we can change the way that streets like this look, and so we can make sure that more moms can raise their kids in the towns where they grew up. This amendment doesn't cost any money. It allows a mom to raise a child in her home community. And our amendment will not kill this bill. It would simply give our rural communities the ability to weather the worst crisis they have faced in a generation. Now, maybe our small towns or this young mom should incorporate as a bank. Maybe then they would get the same kind of attention that we have given to Wall Street. Because, folks, Wall Street is getting through this crisis; Main Streets are not. And it is time we answer this question: Are we going to stand with Wall Street and Big Oil and corporate CEOs, or are we going to stand up for small towns all across America that need our help now more than ever? At this time, I yield to my good friend from the State of Iowa, Congressman Boswell.

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, to many people, rural America is a policy or a program. To Congressman Boswell and me, it is where we came from. That is why I urge all of my colleagues to vote for this motion to recommit. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the work and generosity of the late Harold Brock of Waterloo, Iowa. In January, Harold passed away at the age of 96. For decades he was a leader and innovator in the Cedar Valley and State of Iowa. Harold began his career as an engineering apprentice at Ford Motor Company working alongside Henry Ford. He headed tractor engineering at Ford for 20 years, before moving to Iowa to work for John Deere in 1959. Harold became the company's first worldwide director of tractor engineering. Throughout his career he supported multiple community programs including Junior Achievement, Cedar Valley Hospice, and the Grout Museum. One of his greatest contributions was helping establish the Hawkeye Institute of Technology, which we now know as Hawkeye Community College. Harold's vision, energy, and intelligence enabled Hawkeye to become the premier institution it is today. Thousands of students, families, and businesses are stronger now because of Harold's leadership. A few months before his death, Harold was featured in the Waterloo Cedar Falls Courier for his work and generosity. In that story he stated he was grateful for the opportunity ``to build a better world for people.'' He wanted to be remembered for contributing to the success of people and the community. Mr. Speaker, Harold Brock will be remembered for a long and productive life where he truly helped build a better world for people. I rise today to honor his memory and the legacy he's left.

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the Des Moines Social Club, a not-for-profit venture formed in Iowa around the idea that art can be accessible to everyone. Since its founding in 2008, the Des Moines Social Club has become a source for art and art education through the Instinct Art Gallery, showcasing local, national and international artists, many educational classes, and weekly programs. They have provided the staff and resources to host public events educating Iowans of all ages about music, dance, theater, and the visual arts. The folks of the Des Moines Social Club have been strong supporters of projects that benefit the entire community. In the past year, they have expanded to provide just under 300 hours of classes for over 500 students. The fact that nearly 100 volunteers have put in close to 5,000 hours of service, is a true testament to the leadership of the organization and their dedication to fulfill their mission of using the arts as a catalyst for community engagement. Mr. Speaker, I am proud of what the Des Moines Social Club has done to further the arts. This group of leaders is making the State of Iowa a more vibrant and diverse community.

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. Mr. Chairman, all day we have been hearing a lot of talk about job-killing regulations, but, Mr. Chairman, section 1746 is a job-killing statute that would block implementation of the Renewable Fuel Standard that was established just 4 years ago. The Braley amendment would allow the Renewable Fuel Standard to move forward and allow this burgeoning industry, which is reducing our dependence on foreign oil and creating thousands of jobs all over the country, to move forward. The continuing resolution prevents the Renewable Fuel Standard from promoting clean, renewable home-grown fuel that reduces our dependence on foreign oil. Prior to the RFS, my State of Iowa produced less than 1 billion gallons of ethanol annually, and in large part because of its implementation, we now produce more than 4.5 billion gallons per year. Ethanol and biodiesel support nearly 49,000 jobs throughout the Iowa economy. This accounts for nearly $550 million in State tax revenue. Without the Renewable Fuel Standard, we would take a huge step backwards, potentially having a devastating impact on rural economies across the country in every congressional district. The RFS promotes biofuels by ensuring that transportation fuel sold in the United States contains certain volumes of renewable fuels, including advanced biofuels, cellulosic biofuels, and biomass-based diesel. That includes advanced biofuels, including ethanol from waste material, from crop residue, vegetative waste, animal waste, food waste, yard waste, biomass-based diesel, bio-gas, and butanol. The RFS promotes biofuels and is supported by the American Coalition For Ethanol, Growth Energy, the National Corn Growers Association, and the Renewable Fuels Association, and this particular legislation was described by the American Advanced Ethanol Council as language that would defund efforts to implement the RFS. The required volume of each type of fuel is established annually by the EPA, and this summer EPA needs to propose the volume requirements for calendar year 2012. But the Republican provision in this section would prevent EPA from doing so. If EPA can't set the volume requirement, then RFS won't function next year, and renewable fuel producers all across country are counting on these requirements. In fact, Mr. Chairman, in your area, there are two plants, White Plains Energy in Plainview and Hereford Renewable Energy and White Energy in Hereford that will be affected if this provision becomes law. In fact, the gentleman from Idaho has Pacific Ethanol in Burley, a 50 million gallon producer, and Idaho Sustainable Energy, which is on the front edge of biofuels with algal biodiesel, in Glenns Ferry, Idaho, which will be impacted if this provision becomes law. So instead of investing in certainty that allows these producers to move forward, this provision would pull the rug from farmers and refiners all across the country. That is why I urge my colleagues to oppose this flawed funding language and support my amendment to ensure the Renewable Fuel Standard is allowed to move forward. It is a bad policy to have job-killing statutory provisions that are going to increase our dependence on foreign oil and move us backward, not forward, in the important area of bioenergy. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. I thank the gentleman for yielding. The problem with the language as drafted, Mr. Chairman, is that it is so broad and poorly drafted that it does threaten the renewable fuel standard, which is why all of those renewable energy advocate groups that I mentioned in my remarks are in support of the amendment that I have offered. The RFS promotes biofuels by ensuring that transportation fuels sold in the United States contain the requisite number of volume for each type of fuel that's established annually. This summer, the EPA has to make sure that those standards are identified for each one of the various categories; but if they don't have the required guidance available to them because of the confusing language that's currently in this provision, it's going to create confusion and those same industries that waited and waited and waited for the tax extenders package to be passed at the end of the last Congress are going to have the same type of uncertainty governing their investment decisions moving forward, which is why those groups that I mentioned earlier are so concerned about this matter and are in support of the Braley amendment. They are Growth Energy, the National Corn Growers Association, the American Coalition for Ethanol, the Renewable Fuels Association, and the Advanced Ethanol Council. If the Advanced Ethanol Council believes that this language is so vague that it would de-fund efforts to implement the RFS, that's not me speaking. That's the very groups that would be subject of regulation by the EPA, and that's why this amendment is important to clarify that that is not within the scope of EPA's powers.

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, there are 435 Members of the House of Representatives. We come from all over the country, and every one of us encounters people from the towns and cities and rural parts of our district that inspire us through the heroic action that they exhibit every day of their lives. Mr. Speaker, I rise this morning to talk about one of those heroic people that I've known for 35 years. Her name is Bev Rens, and I met her when I was working with her husband at a grain elevator in the small town of Hartwick, Iowa. I later got to know her better playing softball for a team called the Front Street Tap located in Brooklyn, Iowa, and Bev's voice was always the loudest voice on the field because that's the kind of person that she is. She is passionate, she is fierce in her dedication to her friends, and she has devoted her entire life to making her community, her State, and her country a better place for all Americans. Bev recently had a curveball thrown at her when she was diagnosed with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, also known as ALS--Lou Gehrig's Disease. Bev has always taken life head-on, and that's how she addressed this challenge, the same way she has lived her life every day that she has spent on this Earth. She didn't get into self-pity. She started thinking about what she could do to stay connected to her friends, her family, and the important issues that she has cared about all of her life. Those of us who have known Bev have known her as a nurse, as a community volunteer, and a political activist. And, in fact, her start in politics began in 1988 in the Iowa caucuses when she went to caucus for a candidate named Jesse Jackson. And she participated in her last Iowa caucus for another political candidate named Barack Obama. Bev recently celebrated her birthday on February 3, and you can see her surrounded in this picture by friends and family, including a granddaughter that is the light of her life. But one of the things that Bev's life teaches us is that we face challenges every day, and no challenge is too great for us to solve if we come together in a spirit of cooperation and a belief in the common good, that we can solve the problems that we face as a country. And that's why I am here talking about my friend Bev Rens, because she is an inspiration to all of us in terms of what we can do to fight for a better America. She decided a long time ago that access to health care was an important priority being denied millions of Americans, and she knew that from her work as a front-line care provider taking care of sick people and trying to take care of them in their end of life experiences, which is one of the most precious times that a family gets to spend together. So as a nurse, Bev fought for health care improvement that would improve quality of care to patients and expand access to care so that no American family could say that a loved one died because they didn't have access to the type of care that all Americans deserve. It's important for those of us who are struggling with this issue of how we provide quality, affordable health care to Americans to think about inspirational people like Bev and what she has done her entire life to help people in need, whether as a community volunteer, as a nurse, as an activist. What is the legacy that we will leave to our children and grandchildren when they look back at this Congress and say, What did you do to help me in my time of need? Because Bev never worries about that question. She says, I'll be the first one in, and I will fight until I don't have any breath in me left to give. That's why you'll still find Bev on her computer every day, networked with friends around the country, talking about issues of vital public importance, trying to be part of the important discussion that Americans have every day about improving the quality of this country. And predictably, in the wonderful small town where I grew up, Brooklyn, Iowa, Bev's story has inspired many others to pick up the cause, and they formed what has been called Bev's Brigade, an army of loyal volunteers who show up at her house every day to take care of her basic needs after a lifetime of helping others. It's one way we pay it forward in this country, through the example that others have given us, to think every day about what we can do to help each other. And that's why Bev is an example to all of us of what the American spirit is all about.

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to bring the House's attention to the work and dedication of one of my constituents, Dr. Thomas M. Gellhaus. Dr. Gellhaus is a longtime obstetrician-gynecologist in Davenport, Iowa, and earned his medical degree at the University of Iowa. He has delivered a generation of Iowans, cared for our daughters, wives, mothers, and grandmothers, and done everything he can to make sure their health is well-cared for. For many years, Dr. Gellhaus has held a leadership position among ob- gyn members of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists in Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, Wisconsin, Manitoba and Saskatchewan. He leaves this position this year, but leaves physicians with a long legacy of advocacy and caring for their patients. Dr. Gellhaus has been a key advocate for patient safety in ob-gyn care and care for underserved women throughout the world. He's been a member of ACOG's Executive Board, helping guide health care policy; in 1999, he was chosen for ACOG's prestigious McCain Fellow Advocacy Program, in which a practicing ob-gyn works with Congress and the Administration; and was a member of the 2002 Class of the Primary Health Care Fellowship sponsored by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Dr. Gellhaus recently endowed a new program, the ACOG Gellhaus Resident Fellow Advocacy Award, which encourages 3rd and 4th year ob-gyn residents to work with Congress on behalf of women's health. In addition to a very busy private practice, since 1996, Dr. Gellhaus has dedicated nearly a year of his life to the preparation for and participation in international health mission projects. These projects have taken him to Central America, South America, Africa and the Dominican Republic. He has been the project medical director for most of these missions; organizing, fundraising, securing medical supplies and recruiting medical personnel. During the missions, Dr. Gellhaus has worked with over 559 other mission participants. His medical teams have, over the years, had more than 18,520 patient encounters, dispensed 48,052 prescriptions and have performed more than 1,472 surgical procedures. He has personally financed the cost of many participants' missionary project costs, without which they would not have been able to participate. Dr. Gellhaus' deep faith and compassion are lived through these medical missions. In 1999, Dr. Gellhaus was honored with the ACOG Award for International Service in recognition of his mission work in third world countries. Dr. Gellhaus has a beautiful family, with his wife, Melanie, and their 3 daughters. He reminds us of what is right in America. It is my pleasure to honor Dr. Gellhaus' work and dedication.

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. I regret missing a floor vote on Wednesday, January 26, 2011 due to a ceremony honoring Staff Sergeant Salvatore Guinta. Had I registered my vote, I would have voted: ``nay'' on rollcall 25, on final passage of H.R. 359--To reduce Federal spending and the deficit by terminating taxpayer financing of presidential election campaigns and party conventions.

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I regret missing floor votes on Monday, January 24, 2011 due to travel. If I were present, I would have voted: Nay on rollcall 17, on ordering the previous question, H. Res. 43--Providing for consideration of the resolution (H. Res. 38) to reduce spending through a transition to non-security spending at fiscal year 2008 levels; nay on rollcall 18, on agreeing to the resolution, H. Res. 43--Providing for consideration of the resolution (H. Res. 38) to reduce spending through a transition to non-security spending at fiscal year 2008 levels.

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. Madam Speaker, I regret missing a floor vote on Tuesday, January 25, 2011. Had I registered my vote, I would have voted ``nay'' on rollcall vote No. 20, on agreeing to the resolution, H. Res. 38--To reduce spending through a transition to non-security spending at fiscal year 2008 levels.

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Madam Speaker, I want to show the face of the repeal of health care. This is Tucker Wright from Malcom, Iowa. He is 4 years old. And 2 years ago, before the Affordable Care Act was passed, Tucker was diagnosed with liver cancer and had two-thirds of his liver removed. He faces a long and uncertain medical future. But on January 2 of this year, because we passed the Affordable Care Act, Tucker's father, Brett, was able to change jobs because he no longer had to worry about the stigma of preexisting conditions. Now, when you talk about repealing this bill, I'll tell you why it is not a good deal for Tucker Wright. Because even though our friends talk about wanting to fix some of the problems that they now think are important, the first thing that's going to happen to Tucker Wright and his family as soon as this bill is repealed is his family will get a rescision letter from their insurance company because they will no longer be required to provide insurance for this young boy because he has preexisting conditions. That's why this bill is a bad idea, and that's why I urge you to vote ``no'' and think about Tucker Wright.

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, one of the things that we've heard a lot today is talk about policy, but I want to spend some time tonight talking about the face of the efforts to repeal the Affordable Care Act. And the face could not be any clearer than this young man to my right. This is Tucker Wright, a 4-year-old boy who lives in Malcom, Iowa, and January 2 of this year was an important day for Tucker and his family because 2 years ago this young boy was diagnosed with liver cancer before he reached his second birthday. And some amazing doctors and nurses took care of him after they removed two-thirds of his liver, and, miraculously, he is alive today. And his parents had done everything they were supposed to do. They both had full-time jobs. They had the best health care coverage you could get in the State of Iowa at that time. Yet in spite of that, they ended up with tens of thousands of dollars of uninsured medical expenses. And this young boy faces an uncertain future filled with CT scans, tests, medical procedures over his lifetime--and he is just getting started in his life. Now, before January 1 of this year, his father and mother couldn't change their jobs because if they had, their coverage would have been denied because of a preexisting condition--his liver cancer. But because of the Affordable Care Act passed in this Congress and signed into law by President Obama last year, as of January 2 his parents no longer were bound to their jobs, because they had the freedom to get a different job and not worry about having his health care benefits excluded under a policy called preexisting conditions. Now, what our friends on the other side of the aisle don't want you to know about Tucker is that if they get what they want and they repeal this health care bill, the very first thing that's going to happen is his insurance company is going to send his parents a notice of rescission--that his coverage is terminated because he has a preexisting condition that would then be subject to excluding his coverage. Now, they could do that because we banned the practice of preexisting conditions, and we banned the practice of rescission in the Affordable Care Act after hearing days of testimony from witnesses who had experienced those practices firsthand and talked about the devastating impact it had on their lives. So when we're on the floor tomorrow talking about repealing the Affordable Care Act, I want you to think about Tucker Wright and what that means to him and the millions of other American children who would be discriminated against by insurance companies because of a disease they have no control over. And our friends on the other side of the aisle are telling us, Don't worry, we're going to repeal this bill and then we're going to come back and we're going to fix these problems. Really. You know, I came here in 2006, Mr. Speaker; and I was proud to be part of that class of 2006. But when I got here, the Republicans had been in power for 6 years. They had George Bush in the White House, they had a majority in the House and a majority in the Senate. And what did they do during that period to ban the practice of preexisting conditions? What did they do to ban the practice of rescissions? Nothing. Not one thing. Despite multiple health care bills that were presented in that 6-year period, none of the concerns they're talking about being committed to fixing now were addressed by them. You hear a lot of talk about this unfair, unconstitutional burden of an employer mandate. Well, folks, if you go back to 1993, you will see that Republicans--including my Republican Senator from Iowa, Chuck Grassley--offered legislation in Congress to have an individual mandate because they knew the only way we were going to get costs under control was by bringing more people into insured plans, spreading the risk, and making health care more affordable for all Americans. So why do we find ourselves where we are now? Well, we find ourselves here because of an unwillingness to face the reality that Democrats in the House, and the Senate, and President Obama faced a problem that had been plaguing this Nation for decades: millions upon millions of Americans without access to quality, affordable health care. And that was a stain on our national reputation. And we decided to do something about it. And we didn't make any bones about the fact that this was going to be a priority. Some of my colleagues and I ran on this issue in 2006 because of the problem of 47 million Americans without access to health care coverage. We hear complaints about the burdens on small businesses. I was a small business owner in Iowa for 20 years. And at the end of my career, every year we would fill out five to seven applications for every one of our employees, trying to find insurance coverage that was affordable that would take care of their medical needs. Small businesses were being priced out of the insurance market, and nothing was being done about it. That's why I'm proud of the fact that Democrats took this challenge head on. We were serious about the problem. We listened to days and days of testimony from people all across the health care spectrum, all across the health care economic spectrum. We held days of bipartisan markups to give people on both sides of the aisle the opportunity to offer amendments and improve this bill. And contrary to what you're hearing, we accepted amendments from our Republican colleagues. They were included in the bill. They made it a better bill when we brought it to the floor and voted on it. And yet now it's like we want to go back and eliminate everything good that happened during that period of time. It's like the movie ``Men in Black,'' where they had that little pen- like device that they would hold in front of your head, and once it flashed you would forget everything you had just heard. Well, we cannot afford to let that happen. Too many people's lives, like Tucker Wright's life, are depending on what we do here. And that's why when we talk about these important issues, remember the faces of the people whose lives are benefiting from this important legislation. One of the things that we don't hear much talk about is the enormous positive impact this bill has on the lives of young people. One other thing that has changed dramatically from when I graduated from college many years ago is that now many young college graduates are required to perform an unpaid internship in order to get a job. It may be an entry- level requirement before they can take a certification test, or it may be the only way for them to get access to that employment market. Well, what does that mean practically? It means that once those students graduate from college, if they're older than 22 they get kicked off their parents' insurance policies. Okay. Well, in the past, people would go out and find work, and usually that work had insurance coverage with it. Not any more. We have generations of young people out there looking for work with no health insurance. And when they get sick and need medical care, if they don't have insurance, they still get the care; but somebody pays for it. And that somebody is us, the U.S. taxpayers and people who buy private insurance, who have their premiums increased or their taxes increased to take care of people who don't have health insurance. So this bill does amazing things for young people. It prohibits discrimination of people like Tucker Wright. And it allows seniors access to care so that they know they're getting the wellness and preventive check-ups they need to make sure that they are getting the best care that they can. There's a lot of talk on the floor in support of repealing this bill, about the imposition that this bill has on health care providers and the barriers it erects between them and their patients. And nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, what this bill does is promotes an atmosphere between physicians, health care providers, and patients that strengthens that bond, that relationship, that dependency by giving patients more access to their doctor and their health care providers at the time they need it most, when they are making decisions about chronic care, which is one of the biggest cost-drivers in health care today, managing their diseases, and in lowering the cost of health care for all of us. And yet you won't hear one word about that as a critical benefit of this bill. And that's why, as the American people, Mr. Speaker, listen to the debate tomorrow leading up to this important vote, they need to ask themselves what's this all about, and whose lives really are going to be impacted if we repeal health care. It's time to talk reality. It's time to talk about the Tucker Wrights of this world and what this will do to them, because rather than seeing this as a Patients' Bill of Rights that finally preserves protection between patients and their insurance companies, we are talking about going back to the bad old days when those protections didn't exist, when patients were playing against a stacked deck and were often cut out of the decision-making process. The risk is too great. We need to think of who is going to benefit from this bill and who will be harmed if it is repealed. And I call upon all of my colleagues to search in their hearts and their souls for the real impact that this bill is going to have if repealed. And with that, I yield back the balance of my time.