Doug Collins

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, if I had to defend ObamaCare, I would go into hysterics, too. Since ObamaCare went into effect, the insurance choices and coverage have gotten lower and the costs have gotten higher. Virtually no doctors take the marketplace insurance so I'm left to change doctors who I've seen for over 30 years and switch to ``new'' doctors who I don't trust, and who cannot provide the same healthcare benefits I've received in the past. I have a brain tumor that I have monitored by a very skilled neuro-oncologist. Not anymore. The three choices I was given via healthcare.gov aren't even honored forms of insurance for this doctor. Yes, it left them out again. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Messer).

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. At this time, I think one of the interesting things is, as discussed, the criticism of this. I think it was just a reminder, Mr. Speaker, of what happened 7 years ago when our healthcare market, which could have been helped by many good ideas, was decided to be taken on a very unhealthy bent. We are now paying the price for that. We are going to continue to see that unless we change it. We are changing that for the better. One of the strongest voices that we have had in this body is someone who has actually taken it as his living to take care of people. Dr. Burgess not only came to this Congress with a strong voice of not only what doctors and the medical profession have, but I think it gives us an insight into what patients need as well. He has been a clarion voice through this whole process, before ObamaCare, during the disaster of ObamaCare, and now as we look to fix the problems that have existed. I yield as much time as he may consume to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Burgess).

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 308 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased today to bring forward this rule on behalf of the Rules Committee. Over the past few weeks, the Rules Committee has had the opportunity to hear from numerous stakeholders, from the chairs and ranking members of committees of jurisdiction to the Members who have offered amendments. Most recently, last night we heard testimony from Mr. MacArthur and Mr. Upton to explain their amendments and address any questions from the committee members, and from Ms. McSally to explain her legislation. This rule provides for further consideration of H.R. 1628, the American Health Care Act, and incorporates three amendments--the Palmer-Schweikert amendment, the MacArthur amendment, and the Upton amendment--that strengthen the underlying bill. It also provides for consideration of H.R. 2192, legislation authored by Representative McSally, with 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce. Mr. Speaker, all across our country, the Affordable Care Act continues to strip hardworking Americans and families of access to affordable, quality medical care and offer them skyrocketing premiums and anemic provider networks in return. Democrats smuggled ObamaCare through with little regard for the procedure, left lofty and empty promises that benefit simply a bureaucratic machine. Seven years later, we have seen these promises evaporate as ObamaCare patients lose access to their doctors and lose the very insurance plans they were promised would remain intact. Our friends across the aisle claim that coverage has been expanded and individuals who never had quality health care before now have access. Mr. Speaker, I wish that were true, but it is not. I wish my colleagues and I didn't hear from neighbor after neighbor who can't find a doctor to accept ACA insurance or who avoids medical care altogether because their deductibles reach higher than the clouds. But we do hear from them because Americans are suffering as insurance providers flee from the not-so-free market. You see, coverage doesn't mean access to care. Unfortunately, we have heard all too often that individuals may have health coverage, but they can't use it because their premiums and deductibles are too high for them to actually afford the care. What good does the coverage do a woman who earns $22,000 a year and has a $5,000 deductible? What good does it do a young family to have insurance that no provider in their community accepts? What good does it do to say we want to grow the economy and create jobs when American businesses are struggling to keep their doors open due to the ObamaCare mandate? We have witnessed insurers dropping out of the exchanges and seen premiums climbing while consumers are left with less and less choice. Five States have one option and no choice for health insurance, and nothing guarantees that their residents will keep that much. ObamaCare has hijacked the free market, and it has taken some Americans' liberties with it. We must remember that exchanging freedom, choice, self-determination for securities at the hands of Big Brother too often leaves us with neither liberty nor security. We know that ObamaCare was designed to make a single-payer system inevitable. And to the extent that a single-payer system means a zero- choice system, the prophecy has already come true. Families can no longer choose to save for retirement or pay their mortgages because premiums suck up all the oxygen in their budget. Individuals who want to purchase a PPO cannot because their county only offers HMO plans. Disabled Americans who depend on Medicare find that ObamaCare has given more Federal funding to able-bodied Americans than our more vulnerable neighbors. In my district, a young mother who wants to take her young son to the family doctor post-ObamaCare can't because she can't find a physician who accepts her new insurance. Brittany Ivey and her husband have struggled under the consequences of the Affordable Care Act. Mrs. Ivey was working part-time at a small business that provided her family with health insurance until the effects of ObamaCare on the insurance market raised her premiums sharply. This drove the Ivey family into the individual market, where a midlevel plan took 65 percent of her monthly gross income, even after a small Federal subsidy. Unable to afford insurance through her employer, Mrs. Ivey turned to the Federal exchange, where she obtained a plan that neither she nor her children's doctor would accept. The Affordable Care Act robbed Americans of the ability to choose health care that worked for them, and the Affordable Care Act destroyed the insurance market along with the benefits that competition and innovation offer all of us. The American people deserve better. ObamaCare replaced our doctors with bureaucrats because that is what socialized medicine does. The American Health Care Act is our last chance to get off the Federal ferris wheel before we are locked into a healthcare system that takes us nowhere and offers neighbors nothing but heartburn. The American Health Care Act guts the most egregious provisions of ObamaCare, rolls back the law's taxes, restores flexibility to the States, and helps to make quality care more accessible and affordable. Mr. Speaker, one of the reasons I came to Congress is to repeal and replace ObamaCare and rein in our Nation's bloated, ballooning entitlement system. The American Health Care Act does that by, for the first time, making major reforms to an entitlement program--Medicaid. It rolls back the Medicaid expansion under ObamaCare, one of the fundamental pillars, and it makes structural changes to the program to ensure it only goes to the individuals it was intended to help. The American Health Care Act allows States to establish work requirements for able-bodied adult Medicaid enrollees. It lets States choose between the per capita cap and a flexible Medicare block grant, and it increases the growth rate to cover disabled and elderly Medicaid populations. The bill enacts patient-centered reforms, increases access to healthcare savings accounts, and creates a Patient and State Stability Fund to help stabilize insurance markets that have contracted during ObamaCare. Over the course of the last several weeks, we have worked in this House to strengthen the bill. We have listened to feedback from constituents, neighbors, stakeholders, and each other. Importantly, coverage for individuals with preexisting conditions is maintained as a baseline within the bill. An amendment from Mr. MacArthur further protects individuals' preexisting conditions from being denied coverage. While the amendment provides States with additional flexibility by allowing them to seek a waiver, individuals with preexisting conditions will not be left out to dry. In fact, there are conditions attached to the waiver that ensure States use funds provided by the bill, should they receive a waiver, to set up high-risk pools for those very individuals. With the addition of the Upton amendment, the bill provides $108 billion to help States fund programs such as high-risk pools. Mr. Speaker, my home State of Georgia has very different needs than California. That is why I think it makes sense to give States more say in what works for their populations. Our plan does this, but it does so in a way that ensures protections exist for vulnerable populations like the elderly, disabled, and children. The rule also provides for Representative McSally's legislation to ensure that Members of Congress are treated the same as all Americans. I fully support this bill and firmly believe elected officials should be required to live under the same laws as those they were elected to represent. President Trump has made his support of the American Health Care Act and its strengthening amendments clear, and I stand with him in supporting this legislation to gut ObamaCare and rescue the American people. Mr. Speaker, average premiums rose by 40 percent or more in 11 States just this year. The statistics and the stories speak for themselves. We must act to dismantle ObamaCare, and the Affordable Care Act does that. I support the rule before us today to provide for further improvements to the bill and look forward to supporting both the rule and the underlying bill. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials on House Resolution 308, currently under consideration.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only. General Leave

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I think it is interesting today since we would not be here today if there was not the problems that you, Mr. Speaker, and I have seen. One-third of this country has one insurer, premiums with double-digit increases, people who can afford--maybe even with subsidies the amount of their plan can't afford the deductibles and co-pays. They go to doctors who won't take their insurance. We are not here by mistake, Mr. Speaker. We are here because ObamaCare is an abject failure. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. I thank the gentleman for yielding. As a wonderful manager of time, he will be able to parse the time as best he may see fit. I have other speakers who probably will be coming by, so I will just encourage the manager to manage his time well.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize King's Hawaiian as Georgia's 2017 Manufacturer of the Year. King's Hawaiian joined the Hall County community in 2011, and today employs 650 friends and neighbors at its Georgia facility. I have visited the King's Hawaiian plant in Oakwood and can testify to its efficiency and professionalism. However, what struck me the most was the overarching culture of positivity and respect among King's Hawaiian employees. While the operation's vision and growth both stand out from a business perspective, King's Hawaiian has also become a community partner and leader in Hall County. King's Hawaiian strongly supports Lanier Technical College and the Hall County School System. It invests in Leadership Hall and Youth Leadership Hall. Additionally, King's Hawaiian provides dinner rolls to several local charities and engages the community through a variety of events. Additionally, King's Hawaiian continues to look for ways to maximize its positive presence in Georgia, collaborating with our poultry industry and some of Georgia's brightest agriculture minds. For all of these reasons, King's Hawaiian deserves the honor of being Georgia's Manufacturer of the Year, and I am proud that they call northeast Georgia home.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the 100th Anniversary of the Dillard House Restaurant and Inn. This milestone is a testament to the hard work and dedication of the Dillard family, who have owned and operated the charming mountain escape since the early nineteenth century. The Dillard House has served travelers and locals alike by providing a dynamic getaway experience, with farm- to-table dining, outdoor family recreation, beautiful vineyards, and breathtaking views. The Dillard family first came to Georgia in 1794 and played an integral role in the early development and success of Dillard, Georgia. By contributing to an array of businesses and even lending its name to the Town, the Dillard family has stood as a pillar of the community generation after generation. The Dillard House is a unique piece of history that continues to expand, accommodating larger groups and providing more activities, while remaining loyal to its northeast Georgia roots. The Dillard family embodies the true meaning of southern hospitality and has served hundreds of thousands of patrons throughout the last century. Over the years, the Dillard House has become a landmark establishment in the Ninth District and the premiere northeast Georgia dining experience. Mr. Speaker, it is an honor to celebrate with the Dillard family and to recognize their success before you today.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased today to bring forward this rule on behalf of the Rules Committee. The rule provides for consideration of H.R. 1695, the Register of Copyrights Selection and Accountability Act of 2017. The rule provides for 1 hour of debate, equally divided between the chairman and ranking member of the Judiciary Committee. The rule also provides for a motion to recommit and makes in order amendments by Representatives Deutch and Chu. Yesterday, the Rules Committee had the opportunity to hear from Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte and Ranking Member John Conyers. Their testimony reflected the strong bipartisan support for this legislation and the work both Members have invested in moving it forward. I personally thank Chairman Goodlatte, Ranking Member Conyers, and the Judiciary Committee staff on both the majority and minority side for their work on this legislation. As a member of the Judiciary Committee, I had the opportunity to participate in the committee markup where we debated numerous amendments and enjoyed a thorough discussion of this bill. The Judiciary Committee ultimately adopted an amendment by my colleague from Texas, Congresswoman Jackson Lee, to strengthen the bill. H.R. 1695 passed the Judiciary Committee in a show of overwhelming bipartisan support by a vote of 27-1. The Register of Copyrights Selection and Accountability Act is supported by numerous outside groups, including the American Conservative Union, SAG-AFTRA, the AFL-CIO, the Council for Citizens Against Government Waste, CreativeFuture, the Motion Picture Association of America, the Gospel Music Association, the American Chemical Society, the Church Music Publishers Association, Oracle, and many, many others. These groups represent only a sampling of the broad support behind this bill. Mr. Speaker, as you can tell, H.R. 1695 has brought together many groups of people who don't traditionally have similar interests. From creators to labor organizations to conservative groups, the diversity of support behind this legislation speaks to its significance in the copyright industry and to our economy as a whole. H.R. 1695 also enjoys the public support of our two former Registers of Copyright, individuals who filled the very position this bill seeks to address. Former Registers Marybeth Peters and Ralph Oman have both made clear their belief in the importance of an ``independent copyright advice straight and true from the expert agency'' to Congress. These former Registers correctly point out that this bill addresses a ``structural, not personal or political'' issue between the Library of Congress and the Copyright Office. Despite what some may say, this is what the bill simply does. H.R. 1695 is a necessary first step toward any larger efforts toward modernizing the Copyright Office. It helps ensure that the Register can implement policy and advise Congress effectively, and this legislation will ultimately help strengthen our copyright system. This is particularly relevant today, as today is World Intellectual Property Day. As I discussed earlier today in this Chamber, the importance of strong IP protections, including a strong copyright system, is clearer than ever. In fact, the copyright system in our country is so critical that our Nation's Founders sought to recognize it in the Constitution. Article I, section 8, clause 8 of the Constitution gives Congress the power ``to promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries.'' While robust intellectual property protections have always been a foundational principle of our Nation, today such protections are also a major economic driver creating and fueling the American Dream. In fact, core copyright industries in the United States are now responsible for $1.2 trillion in GDP, representing nearly 7 percent of our economy and employing more than 5.5 million people. In my home State of Georgia alone, more than 19,000 copyrights are registered annually to State residents. Yet the head of the Copyright Office, which oversees such a massive sector of our economy, is unilaterally selected by the Librarian of Congress. This is the case, despite the fact that the Copyright Office is statutorily designed as Congress' adviser and the massive role that copyright plays in our economy and our society. I want to be clear. I think the role of the Library is a critical one, and the Librarian performs many important duties. Historically, however, the Librarian has not been an expert in copyright and isn't expected to be, Mr. Speaker. Does it make sense, then, to make the Librarian--any Librarian--to be solely responsible for the selection of the person responsible for overseeing the Nation's copyright policy? I don't think it does. In fact, the current selection is more an accident of history than an example of carefully conceived policy. By way of historical background, in 1870, the Library of Congress believed it would make sense for copyrighted works to be placed in the Library as a means to grow the collection. While this made sense at that point in history and while the collections are still an important function of the Library, this provision neither requires nor justifies the role of the Register of Copyrights to be subordinate to the Librarian. Today, with the major role that the Copyright Office plays in our culture and our economy, we can no longer justify the head of the Copyright Office--and Congress' designated expert adviser--being hired under the umbrella of the Library of Congress. Currently, the Register is hired according to the same unilateral process as much more junior positions are filled. Under today's system, the Register can serve for an unlimited duration without review or removal, despite the importance of this position. And finally, the Register is not Presidentially appointed, and there have been questions in the courts regarding the authority of the Copyright Office to conduct rulemaking. We need a copyright system for the 21st century. We need a system that will take us into the future by protecting and promoting innovation. Copyright is the foundation of innovation, and innovation is the force that drives our economy. A strong copyright system allows the millions of kids and young adults throughout our 50 States to make their dreams a reality, to build a career out of what they produce in their minds and imaginations. Today's rule provides for an underlying bill that will help ensure that our copyright system is equipped to rise to the challenges of the future and to support Americans as they strive to make their hopes, dreams, and ambitions into reality. The underlying bill promotes American innovation by recognizing the importance of the Register of Copyrights position. This bill would create a selection committee composed by bipartisan, bicameral congressional leadership and the Librarian of Congress to recommend candidates to the President for nomination. The bill would establish a Senate confirmation process for the position and establish a 10-year term for the Register of Copyrights position. This legislation represents the product of more than 4 years of bipartisan collaboration. It reflects the consensus view that the Copyright Office is better positioned to serve the public if the Register is no longer treated like a subordinate official within the Library, but as the seat of expertise and property protection that it is, regardless of who the Librarian or who the President may be. To reiterate, this issue has been under discussion since before anyone knew the former Librarian would be leaving or a new Librarian would be taking over. When these discussions began, there was a Democrat in the White House, and it was clear that our next President would be, possibly, a Democrat as well. Yet both Republicans and Democrats have supported the reality that undergirds this bill, and we have supported what is good for American innovation and our creators and our dreamers, rather than worry about what specific President may make the next appointment to this Office. The legislation is the first step in the Judiciary Committee's work to modernize the Copyright Office, which is now needed more than ever. As the vice-chair of the Intellectual Property Subcommittee, I will continue to push that effort forward, to look at ways to promote better infrastructure and technology at the Copyright Office, and to work to update our music licensing laws. H.R. 1695 is the beginning, rather than the end, and our commitment to copyright modernization and the support of these ideas underpinning it continue to receive broad support. The rule provides for a bill that is, simply put, good policy. The opportunity before us is not about one individual but establishing the right process for selecting the Copyright Register and future Registers. The bill would increase accountability within the Copyright Office and take the first steps toward making sure our Copyright Office works for this century. Mr. Speaker, I want to reiterate that I thank the chairman of the full Judiciary Committee, Bob Goodlatte, and the ranking member, John Conyers, for their hard work on this; and also a special commendation to Ms. Sheila Jackson Lee of Texas, who sponsored an amendment that actually strengthened this bill and provided a process moving forward that will help and, I think, bring all parties some semblance of structure and form as we move forward in this process, a beginning, as I said, the first step in a modernization of our Copyright Office. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 275 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I will have more time to discuss especially the IG report and what it may say here in just a moment. I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn), another strong advocate in our protections of copyright and others in this intellectual property debate.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in celebration of World Intellectual Property Day. Strong intellectual property protections are grounded in the Constitution and have never been more critical to our economic success and culture of innovation than they are today. IP industries contribute more than $6 trillion to our economy annually and support more than 45 million American jobs. In my home State of Georgia, there are an estimated 1.9 million IP- related jobs that contribute $30 billion per year in manufacturing exports. IP protections undergird our economy by promoting competitiveness, ensuring good-paying jobs, and rewarding ideas that have value. In Georgia, which is now the third largest State for film production in the Nation, as well as the home to software companies, ``payment processor alley,'' musicians, and video game designers, strong intellectual property rights mean that our State can continue to grow and thrive. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues today to join me in recognizing World IP Day and the importance of intellectual property protections at home and abroad.