Lloyd Doggett

Mr. DOGGETT

Mr. DOGGETT. Our middle-class families are threatened not only from the challenges of government, but from the big pharmaceutical monopolies that charge our people more than anyplace in the world, from the giant insurance monopolies. And sometimes, sometimes our families need government to come down on our side because otherwise those giant economic forces will take advantage of our families by writing out the very protection that the sick and injured need the most, protection that they write into the fine print of an insurance policy that no ordinary person can understand, where they are told that they are not covered anymore, that they have a preexisting condition, that you have reached your policy limits and cannot get the care that your doctor says is vital to sustain your life, that this policy just doesn't cover sick people or that it can be rescinded. I say we need to provide people genuine protection. That's what we did last year. That's what they want to eliminate this year. Let's be on the side of the people, not the 12 Republican platitudes to benefit insurance monopolies.

Mr. DOGGETT

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, the choice here is whether to give more money to insurance monopolies or to leave just a little bit in the pockets of middle class Americans. But for House Republicans, always putting insurance companies first seems to be a preexisting condition. This bill isn't repeal and replace; it is repeal and forget--forget the health care needs of millions of Americans, forget the hundreds of billions of dollars that with this repeal they add to our Federal debt. Within a year, Allison, a 23-year-old from Bastrop, Texas, who is completing her college degree while caring for her mother as her mother faces another round of breast cancer, would lose her health insurance. Emily, from Wimberley, who is battling cancer herself, would now face lifetime limits on what doctor-recommended care her insurer will pay for. Of course, if her husband loses or changes his job, she won't have any insurance at all. Charlotte, an Austin senior, would have to pay more for prescriptions and preventative health care, while Republicans reduce the solvency of the Medicare Trust Fund by more than a decade. Family budgets would be crushed by this bill as health care costs remain the leading cause of credit card debt and bankruptcy. This same devastating Republican bill would also hike the Federal debt. That's why Republicans have rejected pay-as-you-go budgeting and instead will borrow from the Chinese to pay for this legislation. Yes, repeal is a priority for the insurance companies and their apologists, but neither our family budgets nor our Federal budget can afford it. I believe that every American is entitled to a family doctor, not to an appointment with a bankruptcy judge because of soaring health care costs.

Mr. DOGGETT

Mr. DOGGETT. Our energetic and talented colleague Gabby Giffords was doing what she does so well, the core responsibility of every Member: listening to her constituents in an open public forum. Young and old, Americans of all political philosophies gathered to meet with her. This is the very type of neighborhood office hours that so many of us hold. I have held many of them throughout central Texas. And this is the very type of accessibility and openness that is fundamental to our democracy and critical to a society that recognizes that change is achieved through ballots, not bullets. Less than a year ago, another disturbed individual expressed his anger by crashing his airplane into a building in Austin, Texas, that housed IRS employees, causing great death and destruction. Incredibly, a Facebook page was erected quickly in his honor. What I said then I would reemphasize today: We must turn down the volume on hate to discourage more such horrors. Debate, vigorous debate, is at the very heart of our democracy. Sometimes it is heated and strongly worded. Such strong discourse helps us to set America's course. But violence is not discourse. It debases our democracy. Violence can kill a human being, but it cannot kill the truth. In a free and open market of ideas, truth will ultimately prevail. In the words of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., whose life and work we celebrate this very month, ``I believe that unarmed truth and unconditional love will have the final word in reality. That is why right, temporarily defeated, is stronger than evil triumphant.'' We pray for those lost and the many who still suffer from this great tragedy.

Mr. DOGGETT

Mr. DOGGETT. If you're hit by a truck this afternoon or your child contracts a dread disease, your future ought not to depend on the fine print in an insurance policy you didn't have anything to do with writing. No insurance monopoly should stand between you and your doctor. Unfortunately, the Republican Party has become little more than an arm of the insurance monopolies. They ask for a vote to further empower those monopolies, and we ask for a vote to empower American families. A vote to repeal is a vote to maintain health care costs as the leading cause of bankruptcy and credit card debt in this country. It is a vote to require seniors to pay more, more for prescription drugs, and more for diabetes and cancer screenings. We can stand with American families today or we can kneel to the insurance monopolies. The choice is clear--let's vote for American families.

Mr. DOGGETT

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, on day one of this new Congress, these Republicans take a giant step backwards. They profess such great concern about their ability to cut wasteful spending. First off, they abandon pay-as-you-go budgeting, returning to the Bush-Cheney approach of endless borrowing. They claim they could cut so much, but they reject a rule that requires them to cut spending as one way to offset revenue losses for each new tax break they approve. Their misleading CutGo just cuts fiscal discipline and says to go borrow from the Chinese. These Republicans are like the fellow who bellies up to the bar and says, Just one more round of tax breaks for my buddies. Put it on my tab. Except it's our tab. All Americans will pay for their endless borrowing for endless tax breaks. They are indifferent to our national debt except when it comes to cutting vital initiatives that they wanted to weaken or eliminate in the first place. We need pay-as-you-go budgeting just like a family that faces a high credit card debt and knows it can't balance its budget by cutting off its income or by simply cutting school lunches or other necessities. Neither can America afford to distort this budget.

Mr. DOGGETT

Mr. DOGGETT. ``Moment of Truth'' is the very appropriately entitled report of the President's bipartisan deficit commission, since it took barely a moment for him to cut a deal with Senate Republicans that spikes our national debt upwards almost a trillion dollars in new borrowing from the Chinese and others. This deal borrows from our future to throw tax money at problems with the efficiency of most of its provisions that you would get if people stood and shoveled out cash at the front door of the Capitol. Billionaire estate bonuses, or 1 percent of the people getting a giant tax cut--that doesn't provide meaningful job growth. There is a very good reason we pay Social Security taxes: in order to share in the old-age survivor and disability insurance that is Social Security. This proposed Republican payroll tax holiday is not a day at the beach. It endangers the very fabric of Social Security. That is why the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare has rightfully called this bad deal ``a disaster'' for Social Security. In a very few months, these same Republican privatizers of Social Security will claim, just as they are tonight about the Bush tax proposal, that we are raising taxes on workers when we seek to end this alleged ``temporary'' payroll tax cut. This same dangerous deal for Social Security discriminates against so many people, who tonight are on the front lines with their lives, as our firefighters, as our law enforcement officers, as those who educate our children--those who provide vital public services. They don't get a dime out of this provision. Ninety-five percent of the public employees in Massachusetts and a majority of those in the State of Texas get absolutely no benefit from this provision. This bill undermines a guiding Democratic principle--dignity for seniors--and it undermines 75 years of Social Security.

Mr. DOGGETT

Mr. DOGGETT. Thank you. Mr. Speaker, in this dealing-making, it became more important to get a deal--any deal--than to secure an agreement that reflects our American values and accomplishes our goal of renewed economic growth. This bill is largely a mishmash of rejected Republican ideas that cost too much to accomplish too little. Under this misbegotten deal, we will borrow immense amounts of money from the Chinese and others to provide the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans with a tax cut that is greater than the median income of a Central Texas family for an entire year. This is the same fortunate 1 percent, for the most part, that took two-thirds of all of the income gains in the country during the heart of the Bush years. That is not fair, and it will not encourage significant economic growth. The Republicans will rule this House for the next 2 years. Let's not give them an early start today. I would vote for a bill that creates more jobs and reduces the debt. This is not it.

Mr. DOGGETT

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 6398) to require the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation to fully insure Interest on Lawyers Trust Accounts, as amended.

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, our colleague from Illinois has provided further explanation of the nature of this bill. It is a clean proposal. If we do not get this into law before the end of December, there will be some problems presented. So I would hope not only that we would approve it here but that the Senate would act promptly to approve this narrow bill without attaching any other extraneous matter to it. In closing, I would also extend my thanks to both the Democrat and Republican staffs on the Financial Services Committee for working with us to see that this measure is promptly approved. I would move adoption of the bill. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on this legislation and insert extraneous material herein.

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman and ranking member of the Financial Services Committee, Mr. Frank and Mr. Bachus; my colleague and member of the Financial Services Committee, Mrs. Biggert; as well as Leaders Hoyer and Boehner for their assistance in expediting the consideration of this measure. When an attorney receives funds for use on behalf of a client, those funds are usually deposited in a trust account at some financial institution. Many years ago, leaders in the legal community across America determined that interest could be earned on such accounts and applied to finance legal services for those who otherwise might have no access to our justice system. They recognized, as we do today, the wisdom of Judge Learned Hand's writing: ``If we are to keep our democracy, there must be one commandment--thou shall not ration justice.'' For decades, revenue from these Interest on Lawyer's Trust Accounts, or IOLTAs as they are commonly referred to, have provided a key funding source for the disadvantaged in all 50 States. Before coming to Congress, I served as a justice on the Texas Supreme Court, which sets forth the rules and oversees the operation of such IOLTA accounts in my State. I saw firsthand the benefits of these programs in ensuring access to justice for those who otherwise might be unable to secure justice. Some of those who need legal assistance the most--veterans who have served honorably, domestic violence victims, and persons with disabilities-- are too often the least able to obtain it. In some States, IOLTA funds are also used to reduce litigation by encouraging conflict resolution outside of the court system. After hearing a few weeks ago from Terry Tottenham, who is the president of the State Bar of Texas, and after hearing from a number of other local leaders, I introduced this bill to assure continued full FDIC protection for these trust accounts. This protection, which exists today under existing law, would otherwise have expired for these accounts at the end of this year, when the existing law is to be fully replaced by the extensive new Wall Street reform law. Today's legislation simply extends existing Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation protection into the future. At a time when interest rates are at an all-time low, it is particularly important that there be a complete government-backed guarantee against any loss on these trust accounts. Such protection also ensures that small, independent banks are on a level playing field with their larger competitors in securing these trust fund deposits. This bill is supported by a broad range of groups, including the Independent Community Bankers of America and the American Bar Association. I urge my colleagues to approve it. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DOGGETT

Mr. DOGGETT. Listening to the concerns of parents, the hopes of students, and the needs of our local Texas school leaders, today we are responding with essential Federal aid to education, fully paid for by closing international corporate tax loopholes that should never have been there in the first place. Because we believe in local control of education, we require that the State of Texas specifically forward the new Federal aid to our local school districts, not divert it or spend it on something else. The Texas Association of School Boards, Texas teachers, principals, and school administrators support this legislative approach. Now, those, who have never wanted Texas or any other place in this country to receive a dime of additional Federal aid to education, they complain because we are holding Texas Governor Rick Perry accountable for proper use of these taxpayer dollars. There is absolutely no constitutional limitation on doing right by our Texas schoolchildren. Instead of concocting phony legalistic arguments, Governor Perry and his cohorts here in Congress ought to be joining us in supporting quality public education. You can be sure that Texas is singled out by this legislation. It was singled out by a Governor who grabbed $3.2 billion of Federal aid to education to bail out a mismanaged State government. That's the only bailout that occurred. It occurred last year in the State of Texas. We didn't send that Federal aid for education to Texas to plug a mismanaged State budget. We sent it to help our schoolchildren. And so today, in order to avoid history repeating itself, we demand accountability, we demand support for quality public education and local control of education and not more mismanagement and interference from the State of Texas.

Mr. DOGGETT

Mr. DOGGETT. Today we close international tax loopholes and open more educational opportunities. Last year in Texas, Governor Perry and his cohorts misdirected $3.2 billion in Federal aid to education simply to replace State education commitments, leaving our schools not one dime better off than if we had never offered them that Federal aid to education in the first place. Given this very unfortunate history for our schoolchildren and the many unique educational challenges that Texas faces, we have good reason to include in this legislation Texas-specific safeguards to prevent more such shenanigans with a formula that assures that this year Federal education aid will get directly to our local schools. Our approach enjoys the support of school trustees, of superintendents, of principals, of teachers. We have been listening across Texas to our parents at this time of excitement as so many young people are going back to school, some for the first time, and we are offering those families and those local schools the important support they need for local education, paying for every dime of it, and we are supporting those local education decisions by local school trustees to achieve quality education free of interference from the State. We are demanding accountability from the State of Texas. For some reason accountability seems like a good concept for everyone except some Republican leaders and some international corporate tax avoiders. I want to be sure that there's a level playing field for taxpayers so that the small business down the street that could face a property tax increase if we don't have adequate support for education, that that business doesn't continue to have to pay a much higher rate than some international corporate tax group that has all the fancy CPAs to avoid paying its fair share.

Mr. DOGGETT

Mr. DOGGETT. I thank the gentleman. After 12 years of Republican rule, our tax code is riddled with loopholes. The small businesses on Main Street, the families that are struggling to get by with both spouses as wage earners, they all continue to shoulder a much heavier tax burden proportionately than the giant multinationals that operate around the world, that have operated here in Washington to lobby their way into one bit of special treatment after another. And many of these loopholes serve only to encourage multinationals to invest overseas instead of investing here at home to create American jobs. For some of them, their number one export is the export of American jobs instead of creating things here in America that we can then export to the world. This particular bill promotes jobs in America in two ways. First, it recognizes that there is important work that needs to be done here in America, hard work that is worth doing. In Austin, Texas, Build America Bonds were used to build a police substation, to build a public safety training facility, public facilities that we need to protect our neighborhoods, built by private contractors, putting food on the table of private employees. This bill would encourage more of the same for America. Second, this bill represents the next step in a long-standing effort that I've been a part of to crack down on multinational corporations that get Federal tax breaks only to ship their jobs offshore. It's long past time to stop letting these folks play games with our tax system that actually encourage the export of jobs. It's unfair to small businesses, it's unfair to families, those who are following the rules and paying their taxes in order to finance the tax breaks for those that dodge their fair share of responsibility for our national security, for our homeland security. And making these large corporations pay their fair share, stop the kind of dodges that aren't available to our small businesses, is pro- competition. This bill helps to level the playing field for small businesses across America. I think you can assess this particular piece of legislation by its friends and by its foes. Those who build America, groups like the engineers, have endorsed this measure. Those who want to keep dodging their taxes and shifting jobs overseas, they're counting on Republicans to do the same thing they always do, and that is, assure special treatment for special folks. It is the same kind of thinking that got us the Republican bank bailout. It's the same kind of thinking that's being used here today to defend loopholes that are indefensible when what we ought to be doing is focusing on creating American jobs.

Mr. DOGGETT

Mr. DOGGETT. This is just the latest example of public access in this Congress. With the encouragement of the Sunlight Foundation and other public interest groups, we must continue building on such success, arming citizens with the tools they need to make informed decisions.

Mr. DOGGETT. The Republicans do, indeed, have a moratorium. It's a moratorium on cooperation. It's a moratorium on voting for good bills they say they're for. It's a moratorium on reality. They never miss an opportunity to let their rigid ideology get in the way of us doing something for America, and that's what's happening here today. We reach out a hand on a bill they say they're for and they slap it back. Let me say just a word about openness in government, which has a lot to do with earmarks and this bill, because it's too often good talk but little meaningful action. In the past, this very piece of legislation to spend or reduce hundreds of individual tariffs for specific businesses has been a troubling example of government in the shadows. As in previous Congresses, when I first attempted to learn more about what was in this bill, I found it an impenetrable process. Even my efforts as a member of the committee of jurisdiction to determine specifics about this bill were initially thwarted. True to its name, the Sunlight Foundation shed light on this opaque process. In 2008, it took on the laborious task of creating a database to improve the public's ability to understand who would benefit from the bill, at the request of which lobbyist, and for which corporation. This year, the Ways and Means Committee, under the leadership of Chairman Levin, has built upon the Sunlight Foundation's laudable work, substantially changing the secretive process of the past that governs the Miscellaneous Tariff Bill. I'm pleased to have worked with the Sunlight Foundation and Chairman Levin to make this official database a reality. Now any citizen can look up the details of this bill, learn who the winners and losers were, and see who pushed them over the finish line. Today we have not only a new name for this legislation, but we have a new process involving public participation and understanding in its development.

Mr. DOGGETT

Mr. DOGGETT. To ensure that any money that goes for teachers and public education in Texas actually goes to improve our schools and the lives of our schoolchildren. Earlier this month, statewide groups representing teachers, principals, school boards and school administrators joined about 40 superintendents from across the State to endorse this approach. Through this bill today, with specific language for Texas, we can ensure that our goals last year are achieved and we do something at this difficult time to address the needs of our Texas teachers and our Texas schoolchildren. I hope this rule can be adopted in order to approve this important language.

Mr. DOGGETT. I thank the gentleman. This rule makes it possible for us to consider today a supplemental appropriations bill that contains some vital support for public education across America. Now, most schoolchildren learn that 3 plus 3 equals 6. Last year, the schoolchildren of my State of Texas received an unfortunate lesson in State Republican math. In Texas, 3 plus 3 only equaled 3. How is that? Well, last year, Texas received more than $3 billion in State Stabilization, economic recovery, or stimulus funds designated for our local school districts, for our schoolchildren. But by exploiting ambiguous language, for every dime of Federal support in State Stabilization moneys that went to Texas, the State took away money that it had already committed for the same purpose. So instead of a historic boost in local school support, our schoolchildren were left no better off than if we had not passed the Economic Recovery Act with these provisions at all. The $3 billion more made no difference for our local schools. Congressional support for our local school districts reflects a two- fold understanding. First, that our local districts know best what the needs of their students and their teachers and administrators are. Second, that especially in times of a difficult economy, we need to invest in public education. A solid education is the foundation on which our economy and our democracy rests. Now, our Texas Republican leadership disagreed with both those propositions. They balanced the State budget with Federal economic recovery funds at the same time our Governor was out talking about secession and attacking the economic recovery, much as we have heard this morning. I am hopeful that this supplemental appropriation will include specific language for Texas made at the request of our Texas Democratic Congressional delegation to ensure that this never happens again.

Mr. DOGGETT

Mr. DOGGETT. As one who has repeatedly and vigorously opposed all bank bailouts, whichever President proposed them, I view this bill as modest but very important progress. I'm voting ``yes'' because I stand with working families against big banks, for transparency in the financial markets, with small businesses and family farmers and ranchers for tougher Wall Street oversight, and for progress toward preventing future bank bailouts. The AARP said, this bill offers ``new tools to combat investment scams targeted at older adults'' and will hold ``scam artists accountable.'' The Consumer Federation of America says these reforms will ``improve the marketplace for consumers and investors.'' If you're mugged on the street, you could lose your wallet. But if you're mugged by Wall Street, as too many Americans have been, you can lose a lifetime of savings. This bill arms families with more ways to protect themselves with the information that they need for informed financial decisions. It addresses protections for questionable, often outrageous, financial industry practices, preventing onerous hidden fees that have plagued credit card holders and borrowers, and it creates a new hotline to report misconduct. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau will offer help against unscrupulous mortgage promoters, foreclosure scam operators, and payday and student lenders. This bill should have done more, much more about those Wall Street interests that are paid too much, taxed too little, and whose immense power continues to threaten our economic stability. But with stubborn opposition from Republicans, both here and especially over in the Senate, as well as rejection of some reform by the Treasury Department, we lack the more complete reforms, but we are making significant strides forward in offering consumer protection that Americans really deserve. Restoring discipline, supervision, accountability, and transparency will only be opposed by those who unfairly profit at the expense of working and retired Americans. Whether it's savings for a soon-to-be college student, or an investment in a home or a retirement nest egg, this bill will provide greater security and peace of mind. Let us adopt it promptly.

Mr. DOGGETT

Mr. DOGGETT. Madam Speaker, let's keep America the best democracy, not the best democracy that money can buy. The pollution of our political process with tens of millions of dollars in spending by the world's largest multinational corporations strikes at the very heart of our American democracy. Whatever these giant interests cannot already get with their army of lobbyists here in Washington and with the millions of dollars that their executives already contribute to campaigns, they now want to buy directly with money from their corporate treasuries--and they are no fools. The limitless dollars that these folks lavish on elections are simply wise investments for many of them. They are well designed to spend a few million now in order to claim a few billion dollars in unjustified spending from the public treasury later. Often, the same folks who are reaching into the public purse are the folks who, through special tax expenditures and tax loopholes, don't contribute but pennies on the dollar compared to what a small business might be having to pay in its corporate tax rate or what a working or middle-class family might be having to pay, struggling to make ends meet. Without the DISCLOSE Act, a tobacco company can come here masquerading as a phony ``health care'' coalition. A Wall Street bank can come and ask for another bailout, claiming that it is part of a ``consumer alliance.'' A polluter can defeat those who want to hold it accountable by asserting that it is part of ``Citizens for Clean Air and Clean Beaches.'' Insurance monopolies determined to deny American families access to care at prices they can afford are already out there with groups like Americans for Better Health Care, which is really designed to stymie families efforts to access health care. DISCLOSE Act opponents have a great deal not to disclose. They want to be assassins, silent assassins of character, where they buy one hate ad after another while denying the public an opportunity to know that the views being expressed in that 30 seconds are, in fact, limited to those of a narrow corporate self-interest that is determined never to be held accountable for its misconduct. The public, without the power of these corporate deep pockets, would also be denied access to the knowledge of who is really wielding the power. Who can look at Washington these days and say that the problem up here is too little influence of corporate cash? A vote for the DISCLOSE Act is a vote to stop the corruption of our political system and to stop the slide into plutocracy. It is a vote for a fully-informed and fully-empowered American people to take charge of our democracy and to ensure the change that will make a meaningful difference in the lives of our families. I urge its adoption.

Mr. DOGGETT

Mr. DOGGETT. Madam Speaker, regarding these ill-considered arguments against the treaty-shopping provisions that allow a handful of firms to dodge their responsibilities to fund our national and homeland security, let's get the facts straight. First, there is not one company headquartered in the United States that will pay one cent of additional taxes as a result of these provisions. Number two, there is not one company that is headquartered in a foreign country with whom we have a tax treaty that will pay one cent of additional taxes. And that covers, by the way, over 90 percent of all foreign investment in the United States that we were just hearing about, over 90 percent not touched whatsoever if they are headquartered in a country with a tax treaty. What it does touch is the minority, defended by the Republican Party, that are determined to dodge their fair share of the cost of running America. Those are companies that are headquartered in tax havens that set up their operations specifically to dodge their tax responsibility. We believe they ought to follow the same rules as American-owned companies, as American-headquartered companies. It is amazing to me that the same folks who would defend the flim- flam artists at Enron from dodging their tax responsibilities, that would defend the American corporations that renounce their American citizenship to move to some sunny tax haven, are now defending this small minority of firms that will not pay their fair share of American taxes. And what of this phony argument that we are somehow violating our tax treaty responsibilities: well, it is just that, it is phony because this measure is actually an incentive to support the tax treaty system. That is where over 90 percent of the investment already is; and so we are saying, as the non-partisan Joint Committee on Taxation concluded, this provides an incentive for any responsible foreign investor to locate in a treaty country. The treaties are set up to help American companies. That is what these companies should do.

Mr. DOGGETT. The last Administration offered proposals to address this time after time, and a Republican Congress wouldn't approve them. That is one of the reasons we need to take this firm action today. We see the benefits of doing that in the almost $8 billion that are raised not from American companies but from companies that are located in these tax-haven locations.

Mr. DOGGETT. We are in no way saying that this is the same legislative language that the Bush Administration recommended. We are saying it addresses the same problem and that you didn't like the Bush Administration approach any better than you liked the Obama Administration approach, any better than you like this approach. And the only beneficiaries of this obstruction to a legislative answer are the same tax dodgers in these tax havens that have been avoiding their responsibility. We want to level the playing field. We don't want to shirk treaty responsibilities. We want an incentive to encourage every one of these companies to go to a tax treaty country.

Mr. DOGGETT

Mr. DOGGETT. My time has expired, but many Americans will not, as a result of this bill. Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

Mr. DOGGETT. So very fearful of being held accountable, the giant insurance monopolies have spent millions spewing out anger and spreading fear of reform. We have not seen such outlandish, outrageous arguments raised since the same forces failed to block President Lyndon Johnson from securing approval of Medicare. For Republicans, our bill is too long or it is too short. It is too thick or it is too thin. It is never just right because their true answer to health insurance reform is ``never, never, never.'' Our determined efforts should not be derided as a four-letter word, but you can certainly sum up our many, many pages with four words: you've got health care. With this reform, every insured American gets valuable consumer protections, and every uninsured American can become insured. Thirty- two million Americans will be protected from the risk of bankruptcy from health care. The bill restrains soaring insurance premiums and reduces Federal deficits.