David Dreier

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. I yield for the purpose of a unanimous consent request to the gentleman from Newport Beach, California (Mr. Campbell). (Mr. CAMPBELL asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, at this time I'm happy to yield 1 minute to a former member of the Rules Committee, but always hard working, the gentleman from Moore, Oklahoma, Mr. Cole. (Mr. COLE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, for a unanimous consent request, I yield to the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Mrs. Bachmann). (Mrs. BACHMANN asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, for a unanimous consent request, I yield to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Coffman). (Mr. COFFMAN of Colorado asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, for a unanimous consent request, I yield to the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. King). (Mr. KING of Iowa asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, for a unanimous consent request, I yield to our friend from Indianapolis (Mr. Burton). (Mr. BURTON of Indiana asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, for a unanimous consent request, I yield to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Boozman). (Mr. BOOZMAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, for a unanimous consent request, I yield to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Hoekstra). (Mr. HOEKSTRA asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, for a unanimous consent request, I yield to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gohmert). (Mr. GOHMERT asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. DREIER. I yield for the purpose of a unanimous consent request to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake). (Mr. FLAKE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, at this time I'm happy to continue the Rules Committee and former Rules Committee lineup by yielding 2 minutes to another former Rules Committee member, the gentleman from Marietta, Georgia (Mr. Gingrey).

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I am happy to yield for a unanimous consent request to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Latta). (Mr. LATTA asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield for the purpose of a unanimous consent request to my friend from San Diego, California (Mr. Issa). (Mr. ISSA asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, at this time I am happy to yield 1 minute to a hardworking new member from Clarence, New York (Mr. Lee).

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, at this time I am happy to yield 2 minutes to my very hardworking Rules Committee colleague, the gentleman from Miami, Florida (Mr. Lincoln Diaz-Balart).

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, for a unanimous consent request, I yield to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Carter). (Mr. CARTER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, for a unanimous consent request, I yield to the gentlewoman from Michigan (Mrs. Miller. (Mrs. MILLER of Michigan asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, for a unanimous consent request, I'm happy to yield to my very good friend from California (Mr. Lewis). (Mr. LEWIS of California asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, for a unanimous consent request, I yield to the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Latham). (Mr. LATHAM asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, at this time I'm happy to yield such time as he may consume to another hardworking member of the Committee on Rules, the gentleman from Dallas, Mr. Sessions.

Mr. DREIER. At this time I am happy to yield 1 minute to our very, very thoughtful colleague from Athens, Georgia (Mr. Broun). (Mr. BROUN of Georgia asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. DREIER. I yield for the purpose of a unanimous consent request to the gentlewoman from Ohio (Mrs. Schmidt). (Mrs. SCHMIDT asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. DREIER. I yield for the purpose of a unanimous consent request to the distinguished ranking member of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, Mr. Mica. (Mr. MICA asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, as the debate on how to reform our health care system has proceeded, a great deal of attention has been focused on how partisan and divided this House is. And I totally concur with the gentlewoman about the horror that took place here yesterday with the awful treatment of our colleagues. It is totally unacceptable. I will say I am certainly one of those who has lamented the loss of bipartisan cooperation and substantive debate on the most important issues confronting our country. But I think there is at least one thing that we all will agree on, and that is the fact that the measure before us will have enormous repercussions for the American people for years to come. For many of us, the votes that we are to cast today will be among the most significant that we have ever cast. Health care represents one- sixth of our Nation's economy. That fact alone makes any health care overhaul a tremendously important issue. But it is a lot more personal than that. The care that families receive, the choices that are available and the quality of those choices, these issues couldn't be more important. For many at some point in their lives, access to quality health care will become literally a matter of life or death. Now we just heard a story from the distinguished chairwoman of the Committee on Rules, and we will hear story after story of tragedies, and we all have them that our constituents face. We must all recognize what a sobering and weighty matter lies before us today, which is why this utterly ill-conceived bill is so dangerous and is such an unfortunate, missed opportunity for a good bipartisan conclusion. In addition to the divisiveness surrounding this measure, a great deal of attention has also been focused on the process by which this has been brought to the floor. Speaker Pelosi has argued that the American people care far more about the final product than the process by which it is considered. Now in a warped and bizarre way, Mr. Speaker, she is absolutely right. As egregious as this process has been, the American people will suffer the consequences of the substance of the bill in an even more significant and lasting way. As much as the public was outraged by procedural tactics to avoid a transparent vote on the Senate health care bill, the greatest outrage has always been reserved for the bill itself. This is not a bill that will increase access to care or improve its quality. It will not rein in costs. What it will do is add an enormous amount of new government bureaucracy to our existing system. It will spend $1 trillion at a time when our deficit is already $1.4 trillion, and our total national debt exceeds $12 trillion. It will cripple the small businesses that are already struggling in this economy and will further drive up unemployment. It will exponentially increase the waste and the potential for fraud and abuse that drive up costs while reducing access and quality. It will undoubtedly gut Medicare and potentially threaten the benefits and health care choices for nearly 11 million seniors enrolled in Medicare Advantage. It gives no guarantee to the more than 8 million Americans enrolled in health savings accounts that they will be able to keep their current coverage if they so choose. And it will implement all of the backroom deals that have so outraged the American people, and which we have discussed here today--Gator aid, the Louisiana purchase, the Cornhusker kickback, and the Bismarck bank job. As I said in my exchange with the distinguished chairwoman earlier, this is the only bill that has the potential of being the law of the land by the end of this day. Mr. Speaker, this is a bad bill that grows even more unpopular every single day. But while Speaker Pelosi may be right that the substance of the bill will be remembered longer than the process, the process has been so tainted that we cannot simply gloss over it. The Democratic leadership charged forward recklessly all of the past week or two with plans to try to avoid a transparent up-or-down vote on the Senate's health care bill despite enormous public outrage and harsh bipartisan criticism that came from their colleagues of the Democratic leadership. For days they ignored the demands of the American people to dispense with the Senate health care bill in an accountable way. But when Democratic Members began demonstrating their outrage, the Democratic leadership had no choice; since the American people got it and understood what was taking place here, they had no choice but to abandon their plans. The rule before us will allow for votes on two questions, Mr. Speaker: Will the Senate health care bill become law and will a second reconciliation bill be advanced to the Senate for further consideration. So again only one measure will become law. While the decision to actually hold a vote I have to admit is a welcome one, I hope very much that my colleagues will forgive my lack of exuberance over this development. I can't quite bring myself to congratulate the Democratic leadership for agreeing to uphold the democratic process and actually have a vote on their legislation. It is a sad commentary on the state of our institution when simply holding a vote to make a hopelessly flawed bill the law of the land feels like progress. But that's the reality, unfortunately, of where we stand today. While the Democratic leadership, as we all know, had no choice but to agree to hold a vote on the Senate bill, they have still completely closed down the debate. Yesterday we had a very rigorous debate in the Rules Committee, where countless concerns were raised. Mr. Speaker, none of those concerns will be voted on today. We went 13\1/2\ hours yesterday, yet none of those concerns will be addressed today. While the debate over health care has gone on for over a year, today we will be voting on a reconciliation package that was only fully made available last night, violating the 72-hour requirement. Yes, we will be having an actual vote today. But without open debate, the opportunity for amendments, or the chance to fully analyze the legislation, we still do not have full transparency or accountability. What we do have the opportunity to do today is to answer two different questions: One, will the Senate health care bill become the law of the land? And will a separate reconciliation package be advanced to the Senate for further consideration? Mr. Speaker, it is absolutely critical to emphasize this two-track process because the Democratic leadership would very much like, as we have seen from the exchanges earlier, muddle this crucial fact. If they prevail today, Mr. Speaker, the Senate bill and only the Senate bill will become public law. The Senate bill, with all of its backroom deals and serious problems that are widely recognized by all, that is the only thing that will become law. The Democratic leadership has tried to claim that the reconciliation package will fix all of the problems in the Senate bill. That claim is far from accurate. The fundamental approach to health care reform put forth by the Senate bill, which is fatally flawed, will remain intact. Putting aside that hard truth for just a moment, the more immediate issue is that the reconciliation package will not become law today. It will merely be sent to our friends, our colleagues in the other body, where it will be slowly picked apart like everything else that is sent to the other body. Maybe the Senate will amend it and send it back here for further action, Mr. Speaker. Maybe it will fail to act at all. No matter what anyone says in this institution, Mr. Speaker, no one knows. No one has any idea what takes place those many, many miles away, it seems, down that hallway. The only thing that can be sent to the President for signature today is the Senate bill that virtually no one supports. Let's cut through all of the misrepresentations and distortions. Passage of the underlying measures will ensure one thing and one thing only: enactment of the Senate bill. And I challenge anyone to take me on on that one. A vote for these measures today is a vote for all of those things that I mentioned: the Louisiana purchase; the Cornhusker kickback, which even Senator Nelson wants taken out; this Bismarck bank job; and the Gator aid. All of these things. It is a vote for new taxes and government bureaucracy. It is a vote for a trillion-dollar bill that does nothing to improve access or quality in our health care system. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to reject this rule. The Democratic leadership has demonstrated that when they are left with no other option, they can be forced into doing the right thing. Mr. Speaker, let's start fresh and find the real solutions for the American people that are so critically needed. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.