Buddy Carter

Mr. CARTER of Georgia

Mr. CARTER of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I once again urge my colleagues to support H.R. 1073. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. CARTER of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Franks).

Mr. CARTER of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1073, the Critical Infrastructure Protection Act of 2015. The threats to the Nation's critical infrastructure continue to evolve. Threats today come in all forms: physical, cyber, and electromagnetic pulse, or EMP, events. H.R. 1073 is a commonsense piece of legislation because it would ensure that DHS plans and addresses threats to critical infrastructure from EMP events. Specifically, this bill would require the Department of Homeland Security to include EMP events in national planning frameworks. It would also ensure DHS conducts outreach and educates owners and operators of critical infrastructure, emergency planners, and emergency responders about the threat of EMP events. Finally, this legislation requires the Secretary to conduct research and development to mitigate the consequences of EMP events. I would like to thank my colleague from Arizona (Mr. Franks) for authoring this important legislation. I urge all Members to join me in supporting this bill. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CARTER of Georgia

Mr. CARTER of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I, once again, urge my colleagues to support H.R. 3144. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. CARTER of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 3144, the Partners for Aviation Security Act of 2015. Mr. Speaker, this important bipartisan legislation ensures that the critical decisions affecting the transportation security of the United States are not made in a vacuum without the input and perspective of relevant transportation stakeholders. Unfortunately, the Transportation Security Administration has a troublesome history when making sweeping policy changes at the expense of the traveling public and other affected parties, such as aviation workers, airports, airlines, vendors, and law enforcement. Specifically, H.R. 3144 requires the Administrator of TSA to consult, when possible, with the Aviation Security Advisory Committee before determining whether to modify the prohibited items lists for passenger aircraft. In the 113th Congress, the Subcommittee on Transportation Security conducted oversight of efforts to modify the prohibited items list after TSA made a sweeping decision to do so without appropriate prior consultation with stakeholders. By codifying the Aviation Security Advisory Committee, or ASAC, the committee has a proven record of ensuring that TSA consults with stakeholders on important matters of transportation security when appropriate. This commonsense legislation adds to this record. Another important provision of this bill requires that the Secretary of Homeland Security submit a report to both Congress and the Transportation Security Oversight Board, including important information on the Board's composition and activities. This report may include recommendations for Congress and the Department to improve the Board and ensure that it is meeting the original intent of providing review to transportation security-related regulations and making a meaningful contribution to the security of our Nation's critical transportation systems. Each and every day, Mr. Speaker, there are new and evolving threats to the security of America's traveling public, and it is the important work of the Department of Homeland Security and TSA to ensure that travelers are safe and to mitigate threats against transportation. In this regard, it is of the highest importance that relevant partners in transportation security are engaged and included in ongoing dialogue on important policy matters being considered. I wish to thank the chairman of the full committee, Mr. McCaul, as well as the chairman of the Subcommittee on Transportation Security, Mr. Katko, for their work in bringing this bill to the floor today and conducting critical oversight efforts to secure America's transportation systems. Additionally, I wish to thank the bill's author, Congressman Payne, for his hard work and dedication to this issue. Finally, I would like to thank the ranking member of the full committee, Mr. Thompson, for supporting this important legislation. Collaboration is the key to effective security, and it is the prerogative of the Committee on Homeland Security to ensure that open lines of communication exist between stakeholders, TSA, and DHS. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this legislation, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CARTER of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include any extraneous material on the bill under consideration.

Mr. CARTER of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 3144) to require consultation with the Aviation Security Advisory Committee regarding modifications to the prohibited item list, require a report on the Transportation Security Oversight Board, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. CARTER of Georgia

Mr. CARTER of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Savannah Alderman Tom Bordeaux and his dedicated service to the Savannah City Council. About seven months away from the end of his four-year term, Savannah Alderman Tom Bordeaux announced that he will not run for re-election. Mr. Bordeaux is serving the final year of his first term after defeating two opponents in 2012. As an alderman at-large, Post 2, Mr. Bordeaux's district covers all of Savannah. When he announced his candidacy in 2011, Mr. Bordeaux said his priorities included building unity and focusing on sound fiscal oversight. Mr. Bordeaux grew up in Savannah and graduated from Savannah High in 1971. He then attended the University of Georgia where he received his bachelor's degree in 1975 and his law degree in 1979. Following school, Mr. Bordeaux returned to Savannah to practice law, and has continued to practice ever since. Before joining the council, he served eight terms from 1991 to 2007 in the Georgia House of Representatives. Mr. Bordeaux was also elected dean of the Chatham County legislative delegation. Although Mr. Bordeaux has decided to not seek re-election, he hopes to continue serving the community in other ways. Mr. Bordeaux says that his ticket to living in the Savannah area is to be involved, and that is exactly what he intends to do. Mr. Speaker, it is my privilege to join Mr. Tom Bordeaux's colleagues, family and friends in honoring his many years of hard work and dedication to our community.

Mr. CARTER of Georgia

Mr. CARTER of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Woody Woodside for his outstanding service with the Brunswick-Golden Isles Chamber of Commerce. Over the last 30 years as president of the chamber of commerce, Woody has dedicated his life to the success of Brunswick and the Golden Iles, making countless trips to Washington, D.C., for the benefit of southeast Georgia. But his service and leadership go far beyond his chamber presidency. Woody graduated from The Citadel in 1970 and is a retired officer with 23 years of service to the Georgia National Guard. In addition, he served as a congressional staff member for 14 years to two of my predecessors, Congressman ``Bo'' Ginn and Congressman Lindsay Thomas. Woody has devoted his life to serving his country and his community. I am very lucky to call him a constituent, but I am luckier to call him a friend. I would like to thank Woody for his service to the Golden Isles, the First Congressional District of Georgia, the great State of Georgia, and our country.

Mr. CARTER of Georgia

Mr. CARTER of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of reauthorizing the Export-Import Bank. In the First District of Georgia, the Ex-Im Bank facilitates exports for over 17 companies, more than half of which are small businesses, over $500 million in exports, and supports over 3,200 jobs. Around Georgia, those numbers jump to more than $4 billion in exports from 205 companies supporting almost 30,000 jobs. With the recent expiration of the Ex-Im Bank, many of these companies have suffered the loss of millions of dollars in new business growth, market access, and risked thousands of jobs. While we stand here debating the future of the Ex-Im Bank, our competitors are leveraging their own versions of their export-import agencies to increase their market shares abroad. While I advocated for reforms that go further than this legislation, it does provide critical reforms necessary to ensure taxpayers are protected while allowing the bank to do its important work. Passing this legislation is essential to protecting thousands of jobs, and I urge my colleagues to join us in reauthorizing the Ex-Im Bank and to let the world know America is open for business.

Mr. CARTER of Georgia

Mr. CARTER of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in remembrance of Peggy DeLoach Nobles who entered into eternal rest Wednesday, September 30, 2015. Born on September 24, 1936, Mrs. Nobles was the daughter of Henry William DeLoach and Navada Todd DeLoach. Mrs. Nobles was raised on a farm in Tattnall County and graduated from Glennville High School in 1954. She was also a graduate of Draughon's Business College in Savannah, Georgia. Mrs. Nobles was active in business, and for decades worked as the administrator of the Long County Sherriff's Office alongside her husband, Cecil Nobles, who was the sheriff of Long County from 1969 until 2012. Mrs. Nobles continued her work with the Sherriff's Office as her son, Craig, was elected sheriff in 2012. Mrs. Nobles was a very active member of her community and the Long County Chamber of Commerce. She was also a longtime member of the Jones Creek Baptist Church in Ludowici, Georgia. Perhaps most important to Mrs. Nobles was her love for her family and extended family with whom she always enjoyed spending time. She is survived by her three sons and daughters-in-law: James Cecil Jr. and Stephanie, Kenneth Elliot and Bonnie, and Craig William and Elizabeth; 5 grandchildren and 4 great-grandchildren; sisters, Gaynell DeLoach Paulk of Alexandria, Louisiana, and Ava Jean DeLoach Rooker of Glennville; brothers, Charles P. DeLoach of Glennville and Larry L. DeLoach of Lakeland, Florida; brother-in-law, Raymond Gus Nobles of Ludowici; and several nieces and nephews.

Mr. CARTER of Georgia

Mr. CARTER of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 3762, the Restoring Americans' Healthcare Freedom Reconciliation Act. Over the past 10 months, the House has passed a budget, acted to defund Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers, and repealed ObamaCare; yet these actions by the House have been stonewalled in the Senate by its failure to garner the 60 votes necessary to deliver these important pieces of legislation to the President's desk. Now is our chance. This bill provides an avenue for the Senate to pass what the House has already done. This bill prohibits Federal funding to entities like Planned Parenthood that engage in the practice of elective abortions. In turn, it provides funding to community health centers for improving women's health care. It repeals the individual and employer mandates in ObamaCare. It repeals the medical device tax and the excise tax on high-cost health insurance plans. It achieves all of this and more, while saving almost $79 billion in taxpayer dollars. This bill finally provides a pathway to the President's desk for reforms that we in the House have long fought for.

Mr. CARTER of Georgia

Mr. CARTER of Georgia. I will very quickly. First of all, again, I want to thank you, Representative Collins and my colleagues--all of you--for participating in this. This has been a great exercise. Among my proudest possessions are the plaques that the baseball teams give you every year whenever you sponsor a team, and I have got a wall that is just filled with them. Patients come in all the time. ``There I am. I played ball. That was the team I was on,'' and they point toward it. It was the Carter's Pharmacy team. I want to ask you: How many PBMs have you seen sponsoring Little League Baseball teams? I mean, seriously. Folks, we are talking about something that is essential to our communities, and this is a dire situation. I am telling you. If this is not fixed soon, you are going to see a whole profession of community pharmacies going by the wayside. This is a matter of survival here. Again, we are not asking for a government handout. All we are asking for is to be able to compete. It is to be able to compete in a fair market, in a free market, on a level playing field. Ultimately, the loser here is going to be the patient. If we allow this to happen and community pharmacies go away, the ones who are going to suffer are going to be the patients. Thank you again for this. I can't tell you how proud I am of my profession, a profession that I chose years ago when I was in high school and when I was a delivery driver. After I realized I was not going to be the athlete that I wanted to be, I decided it was time to get serious and decide on a profession. I did, and I could not be any prouder than the profession I chose of professional pharmacy. Thank you.

Mr. CARTER of Georgia. Sure.

Mr. CARTER of Georgia. I do see that. I want to mention just two things. First of all, as an American taxpayer, you can imagine my being in business and having what we call ``taxation without participation.'' Here we have Medicare part D plans that are paid for and supplemented through the government, which I pay taxes to, but my business is not allowed to participate. I am being taxed. I am paying my taxes and am doing what I am supposed to do. It is being used for a plan that excludes my business. How fair is that? I am not asking for anything special. All I am asking for is an even playing field. Another thing that I want to mention is that I have intentionally not mentioned the names of PBMs. There are some good PBMs, and it is not the company that I have the problem with as much as it is the process and the model. I mean, that is very important to understand--we are talking about the model here--but I will tell you this. There have been numerous instances where companies think they are going to be saving money, and the PBMs have misled them into thinking they are going to save money. Let me tell you that these are some of the most profitable businesses around.

Mr. CARTER of Georgia. It is.

Mr. CARTER of Georgia. Oh, there is no question about it. In fact, I have experienced it. Look, I have been a community pharmacist, as I said earlier, for 34 years. I have been in business for myself for almost 28 years now. I live near where my pharmacy is. I live less than 5 miles away from it. I am a member of that community. I was the mayor of that community for 9 years. For 9 years, I was mayor. I served in the State legislature. I represent them now in Congress, and I have gotten calls in the middle of the night. What is interesting and what has been very rewarding for me professionally is when I ran for office and when I would be knocking on doors, and I would introduce myself. ``I know you. I know you. You helped my mother when she was under hospice care. You got up and went to the store and met me there one night and got her medication.'' Now, let me tell you that that makes you feel good.

Mr. CARTER of Georgia. Well, there is no question about it. As I said earlier, I am a free market guy. All I want to do is compete, and I want to compete on a level playing field. Let me compete. You know, when I first entered pharmacy before PBMs became so vogue and became such a big part of this, it was pretty easy in the sense of being in business in pharmacy because all you had to do was be nice to the people. I mean, it was about customer service. It was about taking care of the patient, and that is what we are talking about--taking care of the patient. I told you earlier I have had generations of families who trade with me--grandparents, parents.

Mr. CARTER of Georgia. Thank you, Representative Collins, and thank you for hosting this tonight. This is certainly a very important subject. It is very important to me, personally, yes, but it is more important to our healthcare system. Mr. Speaker, for over 2,000 years, the practice of pharmacies has existed to help people with their ailments. Today, the most common pharmacy position is that of the community pharmacist. Community pharmacists are the front lines of medication, instructing and counseling on the proper use and adverse effects of medically prescribed drugs. However, over the past decade, there have been several issues that have threatened the role of community pharmacists. Being a community pharmacist myself, I know these issues all too well. I believe that there are three main issues that we can address in Congress that will allow the community pharmacists to continue to fill the invaluable role of counseling Americans on the proper use and dangers of prescription medications. First of all, MAC pricing transparency. When I became a Member of the United States Congress and I got involved in government, I jokingly said that if I could learn 10 percent of all the acronyms in the Federal Government, I think I would have been a success. Then I got to thinking about it, and I feel a little silly now because there are a lot of acronyms in pharmacy as well. One of those is MAC, M-A-C, maximum allowable cost. Another is PBM, pharmacy benefits manager. Now let's talk about MAC pricing transparency. This is a bill that is being offered, and this is a situation that needs to be taken care of. It needs to be addressed. It is perhaps one of the most pressing--if not the most pressing--issues facing community pharmacists right now. MAC is a price list. The maximum allowable cost is a price list that lists the upper limit or the maximum amount that an insurance plan will pay for a generic drug. In other words, if you have a generic drug and it is on that MAC list, they are going to tell you what the maximum allowable cost is. That maximum allowable cost may be $10. Now, if you can buy it for $9, more power to you; but if you have to buy it for $11, you are only going to get paid $10. That is why they call it the maximum allowable cost. Each insurance plan sets the maximum allowable cost for the plan. Some States require them to follow a certain policy, if you will, a certain procedure when they set those plans, those prices. Most States don't. In a lot of States that don't, the insurance companies can set it wherever they want to, whatever they want to set it at. They may choose a drug that is only available in a certain area for a certain price. For instance, if I am in southeast Georgia, I may not be able to get that drug at that price that they set it at because they used the price that it is available in the northeast and is not available to us in the southeast. That is why we have got to have transparency. That is why we have got to have maximum allowable cost transparency. PBMs are supposed to ensure that the cost of the drugs do not rise to unaffordable price levels, which is supposed to allow continued access to medications to Americans and maintain low costs for employers who provide coverage for those employees, and that is very important. They are supposed to set those prices so that their plan's recipients, the ones that are covered, are able to get those medications. Therein lies a couple of problems. One is what I just explained, that it is not always available at the price that they set. A second is that sometimes the price goes up. We know that the price of generics have been going up significantly and rapidly. When that happens, sometimes the insurance companies, the PBMs, are slow to raise their MAC prices, which means that if I have got a MAC price of $10 and, overnight, the price of that drug went up to $20, until the insurance company raises the MAC price, I am still going to get paid $10 even though it is costing me $20. That cannot be sustainable for community pharmacists. Community pharmacy is somewhat different from other healthcare providers in that we have a product. We actually have a product that we have to pay for. We have that product. Now, granted, doctors' offices have injectables they have to pay for and so and so, and we understand that. But in community pharmacy, we actually have that product on our shelf, and we have got to pay for it, regardless of how much we get paid for it. The wholesaler doesn't say: Well, how much did you get paid for it? That is how much we are going to charge you. We wish it worked that way, but it doesn't work that way. The way it works is they have got a set price. If it is $20 and I am only getting paid $10 for it, I am losing that $10. Now, some of you may think: Well, you can make up that $10, can't you, and charge the patient? No. You can't do that. If they have got a copay, that copay is $5, that is what they pay. I can't charge them $15 to make up for that difference. That is not allowed. That is one of the things that is leading to the detriment of the community pharmacy. But perhaps an even more important point there is what happens with the patient. Because, keep in mind, ultimately what we are talking about here, when we are talking about keeping community pharmacies open, when we are talking about making certain that this provider is available, we are talking about the patients. We are talking about the patient and patient care. If I am not able to pay for that medication because I am not getting reimbursed enough, that patient is not going to get the medication, and that is going to lead to even more medical costs. That is why this is so vitally important. In the end, what it comes to is patient care. What is the problem? What is the problem with PBMs, with the pharmacy benefits managers? First of all, there is no transparency. There is no transparency in the contracts with the PBMs. For example, several years ago Meridian Health Systems, a nonprofit that owns and operates six hospitals in southern New Jersey, hired a PBM to help reduce their surging medication costs for its 12,000 employees and their families. This PBM projected it would slice at least $763,000 from Meridian's $12 million in annual medication spending. Just 3 months into the contract Meridian was on pace to balloon by $1.3 million. This PBM insisted that it was actually saving Meridian money. It was not. After some investigation by Meridian, Meridian discovered that this PBM was making huge gross profits ranging from $5 per prescription to multiple times that amount. In one example, Meridian was charged $92.53 on a generic bottle of antibiotics while the PBM only paid $26.91 to get the prescription filled. That is a profit spread of $65.62. Therein lies the problem in what is referred to as the spread, the difference between what the PBM actually charged the company and the difference in what they actually paid for. That is the spread that the PBMs work on. The amount that PBMs charge the small businesses, the customer, or the government under part D of Medicare can be significantly more than what it actually costs for them to fill the prescription. As I mentioned, PBMs don't always update their price list in a reasonable amount of time. This hurts pharmacies, and more than that, again, it hurts patients. There has been evidence to suggest that some PBMs wait until 4 to 6 months to update that reimbursement rates after a drug price rises. There has been evidence of that. I have experienced that while I was still working. Ten months ago, before I entered Congress, before I became a Member of Congress, when I was still running my drugstore, I experienced this. I experienced where a product would go up in cost, yet the PBM would not adjust their price, their cost, their MAC. We would have months, literally months, where we were getting paid less than what we were having to pay for the drug. Obviously, that is not sustainable. That business model doesn't work for anyone regardless of who it is. This leaves pharmacists getting reimbursed for drug prices that could be extremely out of date. Any small business in the country can't sustain operability when they don't know how much it costs to provide the customer with their service. You are basically asking a business owner to operate with no understanding of revenue. No one in the country can operate a business like this. We need as much transparency as possible to make sure that PBMs are doing what they were created to do. My colleague from Georgia (Mr. Collins) has introduced H.R. 244, the MAC Transparency Act, which would provide much-needed transparency to the operations of PBMs and provide pharmacies, businesses, and Americans a better understanding of their insurance coverage and the true drug costs. This is a very important piece of legislation. Another issue that is very important and extremely important to pharmacists is provider status. Now, Mr. Speaker, I graduated from pharmacy school in 1980. I have what is known as a bachelor of pharmacy degree. Back then it was a 5-year degree. The pharmacists that are graduating now are graduating with a doctor of pharmacy degree, a 4- year professional degree that usually comes after a bachelor's degree. In most cases, they have at least 6 and, in most cases, 8 years of education. Their clinical expertise is so impressive right now. The practice of pharmacy has changed so much during the years that I have been practicing. I have seen it go from where we did nothing more than fill prescriptions to where now the pharmacist is a vital member of the healthcare team. Mr. Collins mentioned a little while ago about someone asking if they could get a flu shot in a drive-through. We have actually seen that done sometimes. But the point that I want to make is pharmacists now are actually administering vaccines. How does that help us? How does that help Americans? How does that help our healthcare system? Obviously, our vaccination rate improves. Keep in mind, in south Georgia, where I represent, rural health care is a concern. We quite often say that, in Georgia, there are two Georgias. There is north Georgia and the Atlanta metro area and then there is the rest of Georgia. Access to health care is very important in south Georgia, particularly in the rural area of south Georgia, where you find that pharmacists are some of the most accessible healthcare professionals out there. If it were not for our pharmacists, many of these patients would not get those vaccinations, and that is very important. It is very important that we have provider status for pharmacists. The U.S. healthcare system has come into an era of integrated care delivery systems that provide all-encompassing care to Americans. This new structure of care will provide Americans with the type of care that allows constant collaboration with all sectors of health care to provide the highest level of care. As all of us know, the majority of Americans that rely on healthcare professionals are the elderly. However, under part B of Medicare, pharmacists are excluded from the list of providers under Medicare part B. This is something that is going to have to change. Regardless of how you might feel about the Affordable Care Act, regardless of how you might feel about what is our state of health care here in America now, one thing is for certain. We are going to have to utilize all disciplines in health care to improve our system. We are going to have to utilize pharmacists. We are going to have to utilize nurses and physician's assistants. We are going to have to make use of all of those. Now, to my physician friends, make no mistake about it. Doctors remain the quarterback. They remain the captains of the team. We have to have them. They are essential. But these services that have been provided in the old model where doctors did everything and the other healthcare professionals didn't participate has got to change in order for health care to sustain here in America. We have got to utilize these. My wife is a physical therapist. The physical therapists who are graduating now, again, are so clinically oriented and they can do so much more. We find that in all different aspects in allied health care. That is something that we have to do. That is why it is vitally important that we have provider status for pharmacists, physicians, physician's assistants, certified nurse practitioners, qualified psychologists, clinical social workers, certified nurse midwives, and certified registered nurse anesthetists. All of those are reimbursable and covered under Medicare part B, but pharmacists are not. Pharmacists need to be included in that. These professionals make up a healthcare team that provides an integrated healthcare plan for the treatment of a patient. However, I have never experienced a patient that required this level of care without being prescribed medications. It is a vital part of it. If we don't get the medications to them, the whole process fails. Why does the patient go to the doctor and spend all this time being diagnosed and this doctor use all of his expertise in diagnosing this patient if they are not going to get the medications? It is a vital part. We refer to it as a three-legged stool where you have got the physician, you have got the pharmacist, and you have got the patient. All of them have to work together to make the system work. If we really want to provide a fully integrated healthcare system, pharmacists' services should be included under Medicare. This is why my friend from Kentucky (Mr. Guthrie) has introduced H.R. 592, the Pharmacy in Medically Underserved Areas Enhancement Act. This legislation would include pharmacists under the list of providers under Medicare part B and provide a true integrated healthcare team for Medicare patients. Finally, the third thing that we need to do and that Congress can do--some health plans, particularly Medicare prescription plans, have selected certain pharmacies to be the plan's preferred provider. We must have any willing provider, pharmacy legislation, rather than allow insurance plans to pick and choose a preferred pharmacy. Now, this is something I have, unfortunately, a lot of experience with. I have been practicing for over 34 years now. Let me tell you, I have had patients who have been with me that long. They are a part of my family. I have provided services to them. They have come to my store. I have provided generations of services to them, to their parents, to their grandparents, and now to them and to their children. Yet, they at the first of the year come to me, some of them in tears, and tell me, ``I have got to change pharmacies. I don't want to. But my insurance plan is telling me that this is the only pharmacy I can use.'' Sometimes the PBMs will mask it by saying, ``Well, that is not true. They can use you. They can go ahead and pay for the medications and submit us the receipts and we will see if we can reimburse them or they can go to our preferred pharmacy and pay the $5 copay.'' That is not a choice. That is not a choice at all. Other plans will tell you, ``Okay. You can use this pharmacy outside of our preferred network if you want to. The copay is going to be $45. But if you use our preferred pharmacy, the copay is going be to $5.'' Well, let me tell you, if you have 10 prescriptions, as a lot of elderly patients do, are you going to pay $450 as opposed to $50? That is not a choice. That is not something that is going to lead patients to stay with their pharmacy. They are going to have to change, and they don't want to do that. Mr. Speaker, having a choice makes a difference. These relationships that patients have with their healthcare providers are very, very important. So my colleague from Virginia (Mr. Griffith) has offered legislation to remedy this problem. The Ensuring Seniors Access to Local Pharmacies Act of 2015 would allow Medicare enrollees to keep their longtime pharmacist if that pharmacist agrees to the terms and conditions of the Medicare prescription drug plan. In providing this reform, we will be able to provide a free market system for prescription drug plans that will lower cost while also providing comfort to Americans. This is win-win. Now, before you say, ``Oh, Buddy, all you are saying is that you want to force people to have to do this,'' no, not at all. I am a free market guy. You will not meet more of a free market person than me. All we are asking to do is to have the ability to compete. That is all we are asking to do, to participate in the free market. If the insurance company--if the PBM, sets the reimbursement, if I see, okay, this is the reimbursement they are going to pay me, if I am willing to accept that reimbursement, I should be able to participate. That is all we are saying. Give us the opportunity, if we are a willing provider, to participate. Select Networks are hurting us. But, more importantly-- more importantly--they are hurting the patients. Why is that? Because now the patient, instead of going to my pharmacy where it is convenient, where they have been going for 34 years, where their parents went, where their grandparents went, are having to go and travel long distances, particularly in south Georgia, to get to the pharmacy that is a Select pharmacy, the Select provider. A lot of times they just do without. Then what happens? Then all of a sudden medical costs rise, and we don't see adherence. That is a problem. So those three things, Mr. Speaker, are three things that are very important to community pharmacies. I want to thank again my colleague from Georgia (Mr. Collins) for bringing this up and let you know that I have been honored to serve as a pharmacist. I think it is a noble profession. But, most importantly, I want to make sure you understand this is about the patients. If community pharmacies don't survive, this is going to mean that health care in this country suffers.

Mr. CARTER of Georgia

Mr. CARTER of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of National Forest Products Week. The forestry and wood product manufacturing industry support over 44,000 jobs in the State of Georgia. Over the past several years, many architects around the world have demonstrated the successful application of next-generation lumber and mass-timber technologies. These new technologies are providing a new, sustainable solution for building safe, cost effective, and high- performing buildings, most of the time in densely populated cities around the world. By making forests sustainable and promoting wood product innovation, we can ensure that the wood product industry will continue to be a significant employer throughout the United States. I encourage continued support of forest lands and support for strong wood product markets so we can keep this industry healthy for future generations. I thank those in the forest product industry for your continued contributions to our local economy, the State of Georgia, and the entire Nation.

Mr. CARTER of Georgia

Mr. CARTER of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 702, to lift the outdated ban on U.S. crude oil exports. This 40-year-old ban was enacted during the time of oil scarcity in the 1970s in an effort to preserve domestic oil reserves and discharge foreign imports. Today the ban is driving up the price at the pump while discouraging American energy independence. The United States is now the largest oil producer in the world, producing more barrels per day than Saudi Arabia or Russia, but we cannot take full advantage of this strength without the ability to export crude oil as the boom in domestic oil production has surpassed the ability for our domestic refiners to process crude oil for export. The ban on crude oil exports was created in reaction to market conditions at the time. These conditions no longer exist. While the President is opening up oil markets for Iran with a nuclear agreement, U.S. oil producers should have the same access to the global market. It is time to lift the ban on crude oil exports. I urge my colleagues to support lifting the crude oil ban.

Mr. CARTER of Georgia

Mr. CARTER of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize October as American Pharmacists Month. This month it is important to recognize those who wake up every morning to ensure that Americans have access to important and possible lifesaving medications. I know the passion and dedication of a pharmacist because I am one. Pharmacists work every day to ensure that patients' prescription drugs are accurate, safe, and effective. We provide education to customers on possible treatments, and we are trusted and knowledgeable healthcare providers in our communities. In fact, pharmacists are in the top three most trusted professions by Americans, and I am proud to be one. As pharmacists, we all have the common goal to assist in providing quality and affordable health care. We ensure that pain is managed, headaches are relieved, and hearts stay healthy. This month I would like to acknowledge all pharmacists who continue to provide their service in support to Americans across the country. Thank you for your hard work and dedication.

Mr. CARTER of Georgia

Mr. CARTER of Georgia. I thank the gentlewoman. Mr. Speaker, we have known for some time that Planned Parenthood is the largest provider of abortions in this country. What we did not know until recently was just how vile and disgusting the nature of this organization truly is. I rise today in support of H.R. 3495 because I believe States have the right to refuse funding to an organization that profits from the sale of aborted children's organs. Medicaid and CMS should not be allowed to force States to fund these horrific practices against the States' wishes. The advancement of women's health should always remain a top priority for our healthcare community. However, we can achieve this goal without requiring States to provide access to institutions like Planned Parenthood. Taxpayer dollars should not be going to the killing of unborn babies. Taxpayer dollars should not go to organizations like Planned Parenthood that support the practice of abortion and trafficking of aborted fetal tissue. Taxpayer funds should go toward investigating and prosecuting the individuals that are responsible for trafficking in the selling of fetal tissue. Taxpayer funds should go toward the advancement of women's health. I encourage my colleagues to support this bill, but we cannot stop here. In addition to cutting off funding, the perpetrators behind these heinous crimes should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. These disgusting acts are on par with those committed by the sickest of criminals behind bars, and that is exactly where the people who did this belong. I urge my colleagues to support precious, innocent lives of the unborn.

Mr. CARTER of Georgia

Mr. CARTER of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, we have known for some time that Planned Parenthood is the largest provider of abortions in this country. What we didn't know until recently was just how vile and disgusting they are willing to be in the trafficking of fetal tissue and the body parts of the unborn. These actions uncovered from these videos have given the whole world insight into the inexcusable and horrific culture at Planned Parenthood. The heartlessness displayed represents an unraveling of the very moral fabric of our country. The passage of the two bills before us is the appropriate action to address Planned Parenthood's illegal actions. Taxpayer dollars should not be going to the killing of unborn babies. Taxpayer dollars should not go to organizations like Planned Parenthood that support the practice of abortion and trafficking of aborted fetal tissue. I encourage my colleagues to support these two bills and to support precious, innocent lives of the unborn.

Mr. CARTER of Georgia

Mr. CARTER of Georgia. Madam Speaker, I stand today in support of the innocent and the unborn. I strongly believe now is the time for Congress to stand up for those who cannot stand up for themselves. The videos that have been released that expose the appalling acts committed by Planned Parenthood are horrifying. These are despicable acts that are on par with the sickest of criminals who are behind bars, and that is exactly where these people belong: in prison, behind bars. These videos have given everyone insight into the inexcusable and horrific culture at Planned Parenthood. Taxpayer funds should never be used to fund or to offset the cost of providing abortions; and it is especially unacceptable when these illegal and horrific practices, like the selling and trafficking of unborn fetal tissue, are happening. As a father and a grandfather, I believe we must seek justice for these crimes that have been committed. I urge Federal law enforcement to execute a full criminal investigation into these alleged actions by Planned Parenthood. These two bills being debated today, of which I am a cosponsor, are the necessary next steps. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation and to support life.