Dave Camp

Mr. CAMP of Michigan

Mr. CAMP of Michigan. Madam Speaker, I see there are a few more speakers on that side so I will reserve my time for right now.

Mr. CAMP of Michigan. We have three coequal branches of government.

Mr. CAMP of Michigan. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mr. CAMP of Michigan asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. CAMP of Michigan. At this point, Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Oregon.

Mr. CAMP of Michigan

Mr. CAMP of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I come from a large family. My wife and I have three children of our own, so I have seen little kids stick their fingers in their ears and shout ``I can't hear you.'' I never thought I would see the Congress do it, but that is exactly what the Democrats are asking us to do today, stick our fingers in our ears and shout at the Medicare trustees that we can't hear their warning. We couldn't hear it the first time they said it. We couldn't hear it the second time they said it, and we certainly don't hear it the third time they have said it. The Democrats' response to the looming Medicare crisis is as childish as it is irresponsible. By repealing the Medicare warning, as this rule change would have us do, it is akin to be warned you are out of money and still going out for an expensive dinner and leaving the bill for the next group to sit down. You know who gets stuck with the tab in this scenario? The American taxpayer, and it is a $1.5 billion tab in the first year alone. But that is just the tip of the iceberg. Every year we fail to address entitlement reform, future generations are saddled with an additional $2 trillion worth of debt. With the Medicare Hospital Trust Fund set to go bankrupt in a decade, I, for one, cannot ignore, and I urge my colleagues not to ignore these Medicare warnings. We should reject this resolution, and we should begin to transform Medicare so it can continue to benefit future seniors.

Mr. CAMP of Michigan

Mr. CAMP of Michigan. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Madam Speaker, this is not some huge legislative victory, as some would suggest. Instead, it's about maintaining the status quo. I am committed to finding a way around this unworkable physician payment system that we have now, which rewards volume over quality. Every 15 minutes doctors have to see somebody else. That system's just plain wrong. But let's be honest. This bill only buys us about 18 months, and where has that gotten us before, as the gentleman points out? I would like to quote the distinguished chairman of the Ways and Means Health Subcommittee, who said back in 2006: ``I am glad that this bill includes a temporary update for physicians, giving us a little breathing room heading into next year. But we're still going to have to do some very heavy lifting in order to dig ourselves out of the $250 billion hole Republicans created by kicking the can down the road the last few years. In the next Congress, I hope my colleagues on the other side of the aisle work with me to address this problem once and for all.'' Well, now we can add Democrats to the list of those digging the hole and kicking the can down the road. And at what cost? CBO estimates that up to 2 million seniors, mostly low income, will permanently, permanently, lose their current health coverage under this bill for a temporary 18-month increase in pay for physicians. Not addressing any of the longstanding problems in terms of rewarding value and not volume. I can't in good conscience support this bill that pits seniors against physicians. It's a lose-lose proposition and I will vote to sustain the President's veto.

Mr. CAMP of Michigan

Mr. CAMP of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. CAMP of Michigan

Mr. CAMP of Michigan. I yield 1 minute to a respected physician, the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Boustany).

Mr. CAMP of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I would just say, if we are really worried about cuts to physicians, why bring up a bill that has already failed in the Senate? And frankly, I would say to my good friend that every person or group that supports this bill will also support the bipartisan Senate bill that is going to come over from the Senate later this week. And let me just say, if anyone actually believes still that this bill is a serious effort to fix these problems, they need only look to page 253 of the bill. As my friend from Texas pointed out, this is the group that left a whole section out of the farm bill so we had to revote on it a second time. But here we will find a ``Sense of the Senate provision.'' And, Mr. Speaker, the last time I checked, this is the House of Representatives. And this really raises the question of whether in the rush to bring this bill up for a vote the majority even read their own 278 page bill because they introduced it at about 10:00, 2 hours ago, or if they just simply copied the Senate bill word for word. So, frankly, I think if we could look at the Senate bill that I just got an e-mail that their bipartisan issue is imminent, that they are working and they are close to a deal. This could have happened in the House as well if the majority had decided to honestly debate this issue. So I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this bill that is dead before it even arrived, as it has already failed in the Senate. At this time I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. CAMP of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CAMP of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished member of the Ways and Means Committee, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Brady).

Mr. CAMP of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished ranking member of the Committee on Ways and Means, the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. McCrery). (Mr. McCRERY asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. CAMP of Michigan. I yield 2 minutes to a physician and respected Member of this House, the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Price).

Mr. CAMP of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, Medicare bills should be bipartisan and should be fully debated, not on some shortened suspension calendar. My question is just what about this bill worries the majority that they won't fully debate it? Today we are discussing a serious issue, how to prevent Medicare from cutting physicians' payments by over 10 percent by next Tuesday. Make no mistake. That will happen if Congress does not act, and despite virtually every Member of this House being opposed to such a cut to doctors, here we are only a week away from that happening. And, sadly, this shouldn't surprise any of us. Shortly after Congress passed the last short-term extension in December, the chairman of the Ways and Means Health Subcommittee noted that he was inclined to do nothing to stop the cut from taking place. And that's exactly what this majority has done for the past 6 months: nothing. In the last couple of days, this bill has been drafted in secret, and a recent version just appeared at 10 o'clock this morning, 278 new pages of bill. But this bill has been drafted in secret without committee hearings, without committee markups, without committee amendments, and without any chance for public review. This is the most restrictive Congress in our Nation's history. Neither the minority or majority should find this way of doing the people's business acceptable. It is certainly not what the Speaker promised us or promised the American people. Maybe that's why when you break the public's trust in this way, your approval numbers plummet. This is the most unpopular Congress ever, and that's saying a lot. The American people want an open, accessible, and accountable government, and they are not getting it from this majority. So today here we are rushing to pass a bill that couldn't muster enough support in the Senate to even be debated and one that is sure to be vetoed by the President, if it ever got that far. It's the first time I have ever seen this House in such a rush to take up the scraps of the Senate, and, frankly, we would be equally wise to reject this so-called fix. I know I speak for all of my colleagues on this side of the aisle when I say we want to prevent this cut and, in fact, we want to provide physicians with a payment increase. Yet with this bill, we are cutting seniors' access to affordable health care under Medicare some $47 billion, causing 2 million seniors to lose access to health care through Medicare Advantage. What we give some providers we directly take away from beneficiaries. This is no way to manage Medicare. It is my sincere hope that we can ultimately pass a bipartisan compromise this week. A compromise is imminent in the Senate as we speak. Physicians deserve no less, and certainly beneficiaries, America's seniors, and the disabled deserve no less. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' and to demand a Medicare doctor fix that is workable for all parties involved. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CAMP of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, parliamentary inquiry. Is this coming out of the gentleman's time?

Mr. CAMP of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, the answer is yes?

Mr. CAMP of Michigan. I am sorry, could you repeat that?

Mr. CAMP of Michigan. I would certainly urge the Chair to charge time, because you have repeated extended oratories during this debate, and we would like the rules to be followed.

Mr. CAMP

Mr. CAMP. Madam Speaker, today I rise to congratulate and pay tribute to Chris Rice upon receiving the title of Northwestern Michigan Spelling Bee Champion, and for his valiant representation of Michigan's fourth district in the Scripps National Spelling Bee Championship this spring. Achieving previous high marks in the state level competition, it is not only Chris' exemplary study habits but his determination and focus that led him to the national competition in Washington, DC, this year. Chris' natural ability to spell became evident as a 4-year-old child when he began reading the news ticker displayed across the bottom of the television. After continuing to develop his love for spelling at school, Chris enlisted the help of his dedicated parents to begin practicing for spelling bee competitions. As his Representative, I am proud of the great wealth of knowledge displayed by Chris while competing against 288 students from across the United States during the spelling bee. Chris' focus on spelling and reading makes him a true example and role model to his fellow students across Michigan. On behalf of the 4th Congressional District of Michigan, I would like to extend my congratulations and thanks to Chris Rice for his educational achievements and leadership within Northwestern Michigan. I wish him the best in all of his future endeavors.

Mr. CAMP of Michigan

Mr. CAMP of Michigan. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, it's surprising how well the Democrat majority can turn good ideas like the extension of tax relief into bad legislation. Now, we have seen it before and it usually ends in gridlock. And, frankly, the American people are tired of the majority party's record of stalemate and zero accomplishment. But here we go again with another bill that is headed nowhere. This bill could have easily passed the Ways and Means Committee and passed on the floor with an overwhelming bipartisan majority of votes. It failed to get a majority of Republican votes in committee and will likely fail to get a Republican majority here today on the floor. Interestingly, a lot of what is in this package was written when Republicans were in the majority. The Republican bill was devoted to tax incentives; the Democrat bill focuses on tax increase. This is a fundamental difference between our two parties. It is a real missed opportunity not to deal with the alternative minimum tax, which means higher taxes for more and more Americans. That's why you're seeing key groups oppose this bill like the National Taxpayers Union, Citizens Against Government Waste, Americans for Tax Reform, Alliance for Worker Freedom, Americans for Prosperity, and Club for Growth. So what the Democrats give with one hand they take with the other. They'll use words like ``PAYGO'' and ``revenue raisers,'' but the fact of the matter is those innocent-sounding words really mean tax increases. Permanently increasing taxes to pay for temporary tax incentives is a losing deal for the American people. Congress will be confronted with many more expiring tax provisions in the coming years, and if the Democrats continue with this flawed logic, taxpayers will be hit with more than $3.5 trillion in tax increases between now and 2018 simply to maintain current law. With $3 and possibly $4 of gas and higher grocery bills, a sluggish economy, and a downturn in the housing market, the American public cannot afford higher taxes. We don't need a fortune teller to tell us that, just like many of the other bills House Democrats have passed that included tax increases, this bill again is dead on arrival in the United States Senate. So we will be back here again at some point debating this bill again. So after we get through with today's exercise, hopefully we can get down to business and write a bill that will gain a majority of bipartisan support. I urge my colleagues to reject increasing taxes and vote ``no'' on this legislation.

Mr. CAMP of Michigan. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. CAMP of Michigan

Mr. CAMP of Michigan. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. As many of my colleagues have stated, passing this bill is an important step forward in protecting the health of every American. We should be proud of our efforts to work on a bipartisan basis to craft this legislation, and I want to recognize the efforts of the gentlewoman from Illinois, Congresswoman Biggert. This bill should be a model for our efforts to reform health care. We all agree that individuals should not be discriminated against on the basis of their genetic information. Employers and insurers should not be allowed to use genetic markers to deny employment or health coverage simply because they possess a particular gene. But genetic information can also be used to help patients. Health plans have an ability to interact with both patients and providers to highlight recommended tests and courses of action. For example, a person that has a gene for a certain type of cancer would be recommended to receive more frequent cancer screenings. Knowing this, the health insurer would know to approve coverage for these additional screenings because they would be at a higher risk of developing that type of cancer. We all preach about transforming medicine to provide more preventative care. Now, we are finally at a point where medical technology can be effectively used to deliver the preventative care that we envision. I am certain that the use of genetic information is just the tip of the iceberg. As medicine develops, so must our laws and regulations; yet, we must be careful not to stifle these promising medical advances. I am confident that we can both protect patient privacy and improve the delivery of health care as this legislation does. With that, I yield the remaining time from my committee to the gentlewoman from Illinois to control.

Mr. CAMP of Michigan

Mr. CAMP of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of my bill, House Resolution 49, which honors the dedication and contributions made by letter carriers across the country. Being a representative of one of the largest congressional districts land-wise east of the Mississippi, I am well aware of the necessity of timely and efficient postal service. Most of us rely on letter carriers of the United States Postal Service to deliver our monthly bills, drop off our favorite magazine, or ship an important package. Amazingly, letter carriers delivered over 212 billion pieces of mail in 2005. That's 1.4 million pieces a day for every Congressional District. Their dedication is accurately reflected in the unofficial USPS motto: ``Neither snow, nor rain, nor heat, nor gloom of night stays these couriers from the swift completion of their appointed rounds.'' This bill is a straight-forward resolution that expresses the sense of Congress that America's letter carriers make a vital contribution to the well-being and economic prosperity of our Nation and calls for a national day of appreciation to honor their service. It is also important to recognize the contribution that letter carriers make to their communities through their community service efforts and charitable donations. These contributions are undoubtedly recognized by the American public as the USPS was voted ``The Most Trusted Government Agency'' earlier this month, for the fourth year in a row. My fellow Members, we seem to spend a significant amount of time dedicating Post Offices; it is about time we honor those that work within them. I hope you will join me in saluting their efforts.

Mr. CAMP of Michigan

Mr. CAMP of Michigan. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Madam Speaker, here we are on Tax Day, April 15, talking about a bill called the Taxpayer Assistance and Simplification Act. A great title, but this bill falls remarkably short. What this Congress should be debating today is legislation to simplify and reform the tax code. The tax code is over 67,000 pages long. It takes taxpayers 6 billion hours and over $260 billion to comply with current tax laws. That's unacceptable. Instead of this bill, Congress needs to pass legislation to make filing tax returns simpler and fairer. While more and more Americans are demanding Congress make our tax laws easier to comply with, the Ways and Means Committee has held only one hearing on tax reform since the beginning of last year. And just as the economy struggles in the face of problems in the housing and the credit markets, rising gas and food prices and an up- take on employment, the House Democrat budget proposes to hit families with the largest tax increase in history. Instead of reforming the Tax Code and lowering the tax burden, the bill before us ignores both those questions. And while there are some good provisions in it, like I support the provision that no longer requires employees to keep track of the cell phone calls they make on their office cell phones, other measures in the bill make it objectionable. I reject the majority's attempts to impose new administrative burdens on the use of health savings accounts. Millions of Americans are enrolled in HSAs because they provide consumers with the ability to affordably manage their own health care costs. H.R. 5719 will make it harder for people to save for their own health care.

Mr. CAMP of Michigan. HSAs already have a built-in enforcement mechanism that seeks to ensure HSA funds are spent on qualified medical expenses. If a person spends those dollars on a nonqualified expense, they're subject to individual income taxes and a 10 percent penalty. The IRS also has the right to audit HSA withdrawals. Americans are concerned about the cost of health care. Before Congress rushes to impose new burdens on HSAs, the one innovation that helps patient-centered, individual health care, helps individuals take control of their health care, we should find out first if there really is a problem, and then, how we can fix it without restricting the ability of consumers to take greater control of their health care decision making. I urge my colleagues to reject this flawed legislation.