Larry Bucshon

Mr. BUCSHON

Mr. BUCSHON. Madam Chair, I rise today in support of H.R. 1, the Lower Energy Costs Act. Only a few years ago, our country was comfortably meeting our energy needs with our own production. Under President Biden's reckless energy agenda, however, we have dramatically increased our dependence on foreign oil, sent gas prices sky-high last year, and increased the cost of energy bills for Americans and the people in Indiana who I represent. House Republicans made a commitment to America that we would end the war on American energy, and we are demonstrating that commitment today by passing H.R. 1. This bill will flip the switch on domestic energy production, reversing the administration's anti-energy policies and streamlining our energy infrastructure. Included in this bill is my Securing America's Critical Minerals Supply Act, which would address the broad set of critical energy resources that we need to properly assess our Nation's energy supply, identify critical resources for our economy, and help locate vulnerabilities in our supply chains. Under this legislation, the U.S. could produce energy that is cleaner and safer than other parts of the world--which we already are--where production is tied to dangerous working conditions, child labor exploitation, and extremely low pay. It would also help us shift away from our reliance on energy resources from countries controlled by foreign dictators, better protecting our national security. As a supporter of an all-of-the-above energy approach, I know how crucial it is that we take steps to safeguard and secure the energy resources necessary to keep the lights on, rates down, and emissions low. Madam Chair, I urge my colleagues to pass H.R. 1 so that we can address America's energy crisis created by the administration and meet America's energy needs on our own.

Mr. BUCSHON

Mr. BUCSHON. Mr. Speaker, I regret that I was unable to be present for votes in the House last week. My son was getting married, and I was attending his wedding festivities. Had I been present, I would have voted: Yea on rollcall No. 144; Yea on rollcall No. 145; Yea on rollcall No. 146; Yea on rollcall No. 147; Yea on rollcall No. 148; Yea on rollcall No. 149; No on rollcall No. 150; No on rollcall No. 151; No on rollcall No. 152; Yea on rollcall No. 153; Yea on rollcall No. 154; No on rollcall No. 155; No on rollcall No. 156; No on rollcall No. 157; No on rollcall No. 158; No on rollcall No. 159; No on rollcall No. 160; Yea on rollcall No. 161; and Yea on rollcall No. 162.

Mr. BUCSHON

Mr. BUCSHON. Mr. Chair, I move that the committee now rise.

Mr. BUCSHON. Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of H.R. 185. As a physician, I do support the science, and the previous speaker is on the wrong side of it. He is ignoring the science. It is unfortunate but not surprising that the Biden administration is failing to acknowledge the foolishness of requiring proof of COVID-19 vaccination for international travelers. We know that while the current COVID-19 vaccines are highly effective at preventing severe disease and death, they don't provide sterilizing immunity and prevent vaccinated individuals from becoming infected or from transmitting COVID-19. I want to say that I am vaccinated. I wish everyone would be. Thus, continuing to impose this vaccine mandate causes unnecessary harm to our Nation's tourism industry, which has already suffered for more than 3 years. Beyond that, it damages our image as a nation whose laws and policies are guided by the principles of freedom and backed by science. President Biden's continued insistence that international visitors be vaccinated appears to be virtue signaling, in my view, because the scientific evidence does not support the claim that vaccination prevents the spread of the virus. Our neighbors in Canada and Mexico, our allies across the Atlantic in the U.K. and France, and many more countries around the world are declining to require proof of vaccination for international travelers. In addition to ignoring the needs of business and communities that rely on tourism, these requirements make us look ludicrous on the world stage. For example, last year, we blocked the number one-ranked tennis player in the world, Novak Djokovic, from entering the country to compete in the U.S. Open. Do we really think that blocking one individual from the country is going to have any real impact on the spread of COVID-19? I strongly believe COVID-19 vaccines are safe and very effective at reducing harmful effects of the virus. Again, I recommend vaccination, but it is nonsensical that we are driving away foreign nationals who want to compete, visit loved ones, conduct business, or simply take in the amazing sites our country has to offer. That is why I support this legislation and why I believe the U.S. needs to lift this requirement now.

Mr. BUCSHON. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. BUCSHON. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume. This legislation is targeted to COVID-19, and has nothing to do with other diseases. Further, CDC does not have clear authority to mandate vaccination requirements. The order referenced in legislation is implementing a Presidential proclamation and not a standing authority that CDC has. Further, almost every single one of CDC's overreaches in authority have been challenged. CDC is still fighting for their ability to require masks in public transit stations in court. They are still fighting that. Why would we adopt this amendment and signal that they have authority to mandate vaccinations in the future? I urge a ``no'' vote on this amendment, and I yield to the primary sponsor of the underlying legislation, the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Massie).

Mr. BUCSHON. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. BUCSHON. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. BUCSHON. Mr. Chair, it is clear that the Biden administration has pushed its authorities past reasonable interpretation during the COVID- 19 pandemic. With everything from eviction moratoriums and student loan forgiveness to vaccine and mask mandates being challenged and defeated in court, it is clear that the Biden administration needs the oversight of Congress. The prohibition on rulemaking makes sure the CDC cannot impose a future COVID-19 vaccine requirement on international travelers and that the Biden administration would need to come to Congress for CDC to take such action in the future. H.R. 185 is a commonsense bill. As President Biden himself has stated: The ``pandemic is over.'' And, as he announced last week, the White House would end the current COVID-19 public health emergency effective May 11, 2023. We are currently one of the only countries still requiring any such vaccine mandate. The CDC itself has also acknowledged the vaccine does not prevent transmission. Why then are we still requiring a vaccine to enter our borders for legal travelers? Again, reminding everyone that for illegal travelers entering across the southern border, we are not requiring it. Mr. Chair, I urge a ``no'' vote on this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. BUCSHON. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. BUCSHON. Mr. Chair, I want to reiterate, as a physician, I believe the vaccines are safe and effective, and I would hope that people can make the personal choice to get vaccinated. It should be just that, their personal choice, not the choice of the Federal Government. The CDC itself has acknowledged the vaccine does not prevent transmission, so termination of this burdensome and unnecessary mandate should not play any role in the increase in hospitalizations. Based on the current science and what we know regarding how COVID-19 spreads, any individual person should have the right to choose whether to get the vaccine or not. Further, we have seen that President Biden and Secretary Becerra are unwilling to relinquish any power or authority from the COVID-19 pandemic, leaving in order ridiculous guidance long past the date indicated it is necessary or useful. I have no doubt Secretary Becerra would refuse to certify this, so a vote for this amendment would delay or even prevent totally the repeal of this ridiculous mandate. Mr. Chair, I urge a ``no'' vote on this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. BUCSHON

Mr. BUCSHON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 382, the Pandemic is Over Act. A public health emergency was first declared by Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar in January 2020. It was a different time. We knew little about the novel coronavirus that was overtaking the world. We didn't understand how it worked. We had no way to treat it or reduce the spread. Now, over 3 years later, the landscape has completely changed. Reliable vaccines, tests, and treatments are widely available. Businesses are open, Americans are traveling freely, and folks are ready and willing to get back to work. As I have said from the beginning, it is unlikely we will ever fully rid ourselves of the coronavirus, but it can, and indeed has, become something we have the ability to deal with. Society can and should be returning to normal. Even President Biden acknowledged as much in an interview last September, more than 4 months ago, when he said the COVID-19 pandemic is over. Yet this administration has continued to extend the length of the public health emergency, using it to retain fear in the American people and to justify continued requests for Federal funding. In absence of the administration's willingness to immediately rightfully end the public health emergency declaration, it is time for Congress to act. I am grateful to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Guthrie) for bringing this bill forward. I urge all my colleagues to support a formal end to the public health emergency declaration.

Mr. BUCSHON

Mr. BUCSHON. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 75, I call up the bill (H.R. 497) to eliminate the COVID-19 vaccine mandate on health care providers furnishing items and services under certain Federal health care programs, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. BUCSHON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks on the legislation and to insert extraneous material on H.R. 497.

Mr. BUCSHON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 497, the Freedom for Health Care Workers Act, introduced by my Energy and Commerce Committee colleague Representative Duncan. I want to start by making one thing clear: I believe in the safety and effectiveness of vaccines. I am a physician. I am pro-vaccine. At the same time, I am conservative, and I believe in individual choice. It is my firm conviction that, whenever possible, the Federal Government should leave decisionmaking to State or local authorities. Additionally, my background in medicine has informed my belief that medical decisions are extremely personal and should be made by individuals in consultation with their doctors. So, at the end of 2021, when the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services announced a decision to mandate that healthcare workers receive a COVID-19 vaccine to remain employed, I opposed the decision. I believed this move by the Biden administration to be unnecessary, inappropriate, and a net harm to our healthcare system as a whole. That is why my colleague Vern Buchanan and I led a letter with 113 other Members outlining our opposition to the mandate and our concerns. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record that letter in opposition to the mandate. Congres of the United States, House of Representatives, Washington, DC, December 6, 2021. Hon. Chiquita Brooks-LaSure, Administrator, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Baltimore, MD. Dear Administrator Brooks-LaSure: The COVID-19 pandemic has taken a significant toll on the American public both physically and emotionally for almost two years. In that time, though, multiple vaccines have become widely available for those wishing to be vaccinated. According to the Mayo Clinic, nearly 60 percent of the United States population over the age of 12 is fully vaccinated, including over 83 percent of the Medicare- aged population. Thankfully, the United States has seen an overall decrease in new COVID-19 infections, hospitalizations and deaths since vaccines became readily available, and while we are not yet out of the woods, many are saying the end of the pandemic is in sight. Former Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Scott Gottlieb, M.D. recently stated the pandemic ``may well be over'' by January 4, which is the deadline the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) set for complying with either its vaccination mandate or enforcing the continued use of masks and weekly testing. At a time when we are facing a growing health care workforce shortage--including a projected physician shortage of more than 100,000 by 2034--implementing a federal vaccine mandate will only serve to exacerbate the problem. By your own admission, ``[t]hese requirements will apply to approximately 76,000 providers and cover over 17 million health care workers across the country.'' It is difficult, if not impossible, to reconcile the rationale for implementing a mandate like this at the tail end of the pandemic while we, as a nation, are struggling to staff hospitals, physician offices and other ancillary providers. We fully support your agency's goal of ``[e]nsuring patient safety and protection,'' but if seniors are unable to access care because their provider no longer participates in the Medicare program, this rule will undermine its stated goal. By subjecting providers to egregious federal overreach, our nation's most vulnerable populations will be at risk and America's seniors will bear the brunt of any provider loss due to non-compliance with this heavy-handed and constitutionally dubious vaccine mandate. Americans are quitting their jobs at a record pace, and this new federal mandate will only make matters worse and keep more Americans out of the workforce. There are over 54 million Medicare-aged Americans, and it is our duty as Members of Congress representing those seniors to ensure they maintain access to their preferred health care provider. This is especially true when that means opposing an administrative agency's actions that will lead to fewer options for our constituents; longer wait times; and the inevitability of adverse health outcomes due to fewer available providers. We strongly urge you to abandon implementing this onerous new rule and instead heed current statistics that show seniors are vaccinated at a higher rate than the rest of the population of vaccinated Americans while also uniquely vulnerable to disruptions in the health care system and consider the potentially negative consequences this mandate will have on the size and strength of our health care workforce. To truly ensure patient safety and protection, we must preserve Americans' access to their preferred providers rather than impose a new one-size-fits-all federal mandate on our nation's health care providers at a time when they can least afford it. Sincerely, Vern Buchanan, Elise Stefanik, Jeff Duncan, Jodey V. Arrington, Mike Kelly, Larry Bucshon, M.D., Jim Banks, Brett Guthrie, Jackie Walorski, David B. McKinley, P.E., Gus M. Bilirakis, Bill Johnson, Debbie Lesko, Dan Crenshaw, Bill Posey, Bob Gibbs, Ralph Norman, John Joyce, M.D., Markwayne Mullin, Earl L. ``Buddy'' Carter, Michael Waltz, Doug Lamborn, Randy Feenstra, Neal P. Dunn, M.D., Brian Mast, Robert E. Latta. Guy Reschenthaler, Kelly Armstrong, William Timmons, Gregory F. Murphy, M.D., Mike Johnson, Beth Van Duyne, Darin LaHood, Warren Davidson, Brian Babin, D.D.S., Brad R. Wenstrup, D.P.M., Glen Grothman, John H. Rutherford, Adrian Smith, Fred Keller, Jack Bergman, Michelle Steel, Kevin Hern, Dan Newhouse, Michael Cloud, Troy Balderson, A. Drew Ferguson, IV, D.M.D., John Moolenaar, Tim Burchett, C. Scott Franklin, Barry Moore, Tom McClintock, Eric A. ``Rick'' Crawford, Ronny L. Jackson, M.D., Jody Hice, Diana Harshbarger, Parm.D., Jason Smith, Tom Rice. Tom Reed, Carlos Gimenez, Pete Sessions, Greg Pence, Ben Cline, Glenn ``GT'' Thompson, Mariannette J. Miller-Meeks, M.D., Claudia Tenney, Mike Rogers, Ron Estes, Ted Budd, Andy Harris, M.D., David Kustoff, Steve Chabot, Michael Guest, W. Gregory Steube, Randy K. Weber, Majorie Taylor Green, Lance Gooden, Pat Fallon, Michael C. Burgess, M.D., Kat Cammack, Andy Biggs, Carol D. Miller, Andrew S. Clyde, Devin Nunes, Stephanie Bice, Tracey Mann, Daniel Webster, Mary Miller, Darrell Issa, Rodney Davis. Lisa McClain, Richard Hudson, Ann Wagner, Mario Diaz- Balart, Lloyd Smucker, Jeff Fortenberry, Dan Bishop, Jim Baird, John Rose, Louie Gohmert, David Schweikert, Rick W. Allen, Bill Huizenga, Bryon Donalds, Bruce Westerman, Andrew R. Garbarino, Nancy Mace, Vicky Hartzler, Steven M. Palazzo, Jake LaTurner, Chuck Fleischmann, Tom Emmer, Austin Scott, Trey Hollingsworth, Mike Bost.

Mr. BUCSHON. The move was unprecedented. CMS does not impose such a mandate for any other vaccine. Furthermore, the vaccine, while effective at preventing severe disease and death, is not shown to totally prevent transmission of the virus. It was difficult, if not impossible, to reconcile the rationale for implementing a mandate like this at the tail end of the pandemic while we as a Nation are struggling to staff hospitals, physician offices, and other ancillary providers. Our Nation's healthcare system was already facing a growing healthcare workforce shortage, including a projected physician shortage of more than 100,000 by 2034. I was worried--and, indeed, we saw it play out--that implementing a Federal vaccine mandate would only serve to exacerbate the problem. For example, in my home State, Indiana University lost 125 employees as a direct result of the vaccine requirement, and that is just one small example. Thousands of individuals across the country either resigned or were let go due to this mandate. Now, over a year later, despite several lawsuits rising through the courts questioning the validity of this exact rule, the Biden administration continues to enforce this mandate. Today's bill does what the Biden administration will not. It ends the onerous mandate imposed by a Federal Government agency on the American people. It provides important autonomy to healthcare workers and critical relief to hospitals and other facilities that continue to face staff shortages. My Democratic colleagues will say that this mandate was worth it, that repealing it will hurt healthcare workers or patients they serve. I haven't seen any data to suggest that. What we do know is that 95 percent of Americans have either been vaccinated or had COVID-19. We know the vaccine no longer totally prevents transmission of COVID-19. CMS' vaccine mandate won't end with the public health emergency on May 11 or sooner if the previous bill that we just debated goes into law. It will go on indefinitely unless the administration rescinds it or Congress takes action. Given that the administration threatened to veto this legislation, it doesn't seem like they plan to reverse course, so Congress must step in. We are not taking away anyone's ability to get vaccinated. Healthcare workers can and should protect themselves, including getting vaccinated if they choose. Nor are we taking away the ability of individual health systems to make decisions about what vaccinations they may require. For instance, many healthcare systems have required employees to get a flu shot for many years. The Federal Government simply shouldn't demand they do so. Federal bureaucrats in Washington, D.C., do not know the needs of Hoosiers in my district or many Americans across the country and must not be allowed to make medical decisions on their behalf. Mr. Speaker, for all of these reasons, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 497 here today, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BUCSHON. Mr. Speaker, I just want to remind everyone that I am a physician, and I support vaccination. I just don't support the Federal Government mandating it. If local facilities want to mandate vaccination, that is up to them. I just don't believe the Federal Government at CMS should do it. Also, in recent history, the only ones who have cut Medicare are the administration and the Democrats, not Republicans. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Duncan), the primary sponsor of the bill.

Mr. BUCSHON. Mr. Speaker, CMS mandates one vaccine, COVID-19. They don't mandate any other vaccines. That doesn't mean healthcare workers don't get the COVID-19 vaccine. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Washington (Mrs. Rodgers), the chairwoman of the Energy and Commerce Committee.

Mr. BUCSHON. Mr. Speaker, I just want to remind everyone that CMS doesn't mandate any other vaccine, and this also doesn't preclude local hospital systems, local governments, or State governments from mandating a vaccine. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Guthrie), the chairman of the Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Health.

Mr. BUCSHON. Mr. Speaker, I support vaccination of healthcare workers. I just don't think that CMS should be mandating it nationally. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Carter), a pharmacist.

Mr. BUCSHON. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BUCSHON. Mr. Speaker, no one is endangered by this legislation. As I have said before, it doesn't prevent healthcare facilities from requiring a COVID vaccine for their employees. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Pfluger).

Mr. BUCSHON. Mr. Speaker, viral diseases like measles have been around for centuries. COVID-19 likely will also be persistent. So, when do my Democratic colleagues propose that this Federal mandate end? I propose that we pass this legislation and end it. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Mrs. Cammack).

Mr. BUCSHON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Iowa (Mrs. Miller-Meeks), who is a physician.

Mr. BUCSHON. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 15 seconds to the gentlewoman from Iowa.