Phil Gingrey

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. If the gentleman will yield.

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, even so, we're talking about one-sixth of the whole economy of this great country of ours, and it's going to expand. I yield back to the gentleman.

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. If the gentleman would yield.

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. If the gentleman will yield, Mr. Speaker, just for a second. The American people--and I think that my colleagues would agree with me--the American people have spoken, haven't they?

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. Over 60 percent of them are vehemently opposed to this government takeover that Dr. Broun is talking about. I will make one other comment before yielding back to my friend, and that is that the Speaker herself--Mr. Speaker, you're in her stead in the chair this evening, but the Speaker, back in 2006 on the campaign trail when your party did indeed take over the majority, Mr. Speaker, Madam Speaker--minority leader at the time--said to the American people, You give us an opportunity to take back over control of the leadership of this Congress, this House of Representatives, and you will see the most open process you have ever seen. It will be a breath of fresh air. That sun will be shining in. The American people will come up and the children will sit around as I'm sworn in and they will be right there at my knee and I will be patting them on the head, Mr. Speaker, she said. And it will be wonderful. Happy days are here again. Well, when you say something like that--and I think my colleagues agree with me, Mr. Speaker--you need to deliver. Now, she could have said, back in 2006 on the campaign trail, These rotten Republicans who have run this place for 12 years and they haven't given us a fair shake. Man, you give us an opportunity, put us back in, when we get there, we are going to roll them at every opportunity. Well, she would have been speaking the truth, Mr. Speaker. Madam Speaker would have been speaking the truth. That's what she should have done because that's what she did. We have no openness here. It's kind of like our current President said, you know, a change you can believe in. Mr. Speaker, I don't think this is the change the American people were expecting, and they certainly don't believe in it. I yield back to my colleague.

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. If the gentleman will yield----

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. I thank the gentleman from Tennessee. I thank the gentleman from Texas. I thank the gentleman from the great State of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, we thank all for the opportunity for the members of the GOP Doctors Caucus to spend some time tonight to explain to our colleagues on both sides of the aisle what our concerns are. I think we did it in a very fair way. We did it in a way that is not a personal attack on any individual, any Member of this body, any member of the administration. We are just asking to give the American people a fair shake. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding. I do rise in full support of my good friend and colleague from Florida, Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz, for introducing this resolution. I certainly encourage all of my colleagues to support it. I am sure if we have a recorded vote, the vote will be 100 percent in favor of this resolution. But, Mr. Speaker, as my colleague from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn) and my colleague from Michigan (Mr. Rogers), both members of the Energy and Commerce Committee, both, as well as myself, at that hearing when we heard from the American Cancer Society and when we heard from the other witnesses, such as Susan G. Komen for the Cure organization, and in talking with my own specialty society, the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology, they will continue to recommend very strongly that women in their 40s continue to be screened, to have mammogram screening, maybe even digital mammogram screening, because they are at high risk. Mr. Speaker, as our colleagues have pointed out, the two in our body, our colleagues that are victims of breast cancer, God forbid if they had not gotten early detection, maybe their outcome would not be so great. I think that because of early detection their cure is probably almost 100 percent. So we are in a situation where physicians practicing across this country, they are sort of in a catch-22. If they don't follow these guidelines that will be passed in this bill, in the Senate version, when this United States Preventive Services Task Force will no longer be an organization making recommendations, but they will be making law, they will be issuing mandates, if a physician decides, well, my patient is in their 40s, I'm going to go ahead and order a mammogram anyway and that mammogram is suspicious and it leads to a needle biopsy, which may turn out to be negative, but it results in a complication, such as a breast abscess, that physician, Mr. Speaker, could be sued for practicing below the standard of government health care as established by this new massive bill that the Democrats want to force on the American public. So I stand here commending Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz and this resolution; I am in favor of it. But I would also recommend that my colleagues on the Democratic side of the aisle instruct their conferees, if this massive health care reform bill goes to conference, to take this resolution with them and say, look, these are our concerns, change the language. That's my recommendation. That's what my colleagues can do for the women in this country, the 47,000 that Congressman Mike Rogers from Michigan was talking about. I think my colleagues on this side of the aisle are absolutely right as they point out in this legislation what the danger is.

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, the Democratic Member from Connecticut just said it's prophetic that the government should be on our shoulders. Unfortunately, the government is on our backs, and it shouldn't be. And no better example of that is this massive health care reform bill, a complete government takeover of health care, bureaucrats coming between doctors and patients. People in this country have spoken loudly, but the Democratic majority is not listening. In my 11th Congressional District of Georgia, Mr. Speaker, there are 95,000 people on Medicare, and 13,000 of them, 14 percent of the total, get their coverage under Medicare Advantage. That will be taken away from them as we strip $120 billion out of the Medicare Advantage program. What that means, Mr. Speaker, is that those 13,000 people in my district will have to pay an additional $180 a month for the Medicare fee-for-service coverage if they can find a doctor that will take them. They will have to buy a prescription drug plan at $30 a month and buy a supplemental Medigap plan to cover many of the things that are covered under Medicare Advantage without additional cost. That policy will cost them $150 a month. That's why the American people are outraged over this plan. Listen up, Members. Vote ``no.''

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. Madam Speaker, I would like to congratulate the Harrison High School marching band for being selected to participate in this year's Macys' Thanksgiving Day Parade. The Hoyas were one of 8 high school marching bands chosen nationwide to participate in this once in a lifetime experience. Being awarded this prestigious distinction for the Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade is recognition of being one of the very best high school bands in the country. The Hoyas' selection is a testament to their dedication, devotion and hard work. The parade was a perfect opportunity for them to showcase their skills and countless hours of practice, and anyone who saw the parade on TV on Thanksgiving Day knows they did us proud. I'd also like to commend the parents, faculty, and entire community who worked to make this possible by supporting the 193-member band. Madam Speaker, on behalf of all my constituents, I am proud to congratulate the Hoyas on their selection and for their success at the parade.

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate a few outstanding high school football teams for their efforts in the State playoffs. These tremendous athletes are an exemplification of true dedication and remarkable talent. The teams being recognized in the 11th District of Georgia are as follows: Bremen High School in Haralson County; Bowdon High School, Carroll County; the Darlington School in Troup County; Trion High School in Chattooga County; Armuchee High School in Floyd County; Pepperell High School in Floyd County; Chattooga High School, Chattooga County; Calhoun High School in Gordon County; Carrollton High School, again, Carroll County; Hiram High School in Paulding County; McEachern High School in Cobb County; and last but not least, Marietta High School in Cobb County. Mr. Speaker, I applaud these young men, their bands, their dance teams, their cheerleaders, for proving themselves such sound competitors in the State playoffs. I am certainly proud of them for their achievements. Congratulations to all on a great season.

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. Madam Speaker, yesterday this House voted on a 2,500-page spending bill with a price tag of almost a half trillion dollars that we will have to borrow. The majority in this House just doesn't seem to get it. We are in the midst of a recession, with 10 percent unemployment, 15.4 million people out of work. Our Federal deficit is over $12 trillion, and the Democrats will vote next week to raise that another $1.8 trillion. Yet this half-trillion-dollar spending bill, which combines six into one, represents a 12.5 percent spending increase over 2009 and a 24 percent increase over 2008; 24 percent over 2008. I ask, How much of this is real needs of our citizens versus just wants of spendthrift politicians? Madam Speaker, the Democrats must stop this reckless spending spree. We need to have the ability to make tough choices to get our economy back on track and pass legislation that helps American families looking to make ends meet in these tough times.

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I ask you to reflect on the impact that Democratic plans for the economy have on working families across the United States. This past November we reached the highest level of unemployment since 1983, 10.2 percent. And given the Democrats' pending misguided ideas for overhauling the health care and the energy sectors, there is no end in sight. And now, Mr. Speaker, we hear plans for, yes, you guessed it, more spending. After their failed ``non-stimulus'' stimulus bill, the Democrats are planning another reckless round of stimulus spending, even if they may call it something else. Mr. Speaker, America simply cannot afford another spending spree by this Democratic majority. There's a way to boost the economy without relying on all this irresponsible and unnecessary spending. Simply put, Republicans have superior plans for energy independence and health care reform that are attainable. They will not drive our country further into debt and will not kill jobs.

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today as a cosponsor of H. Con. Res. 206, a resolution commending the soldiers and civilian personnel stationed at Fort Gordon and their families for their service and dedication to the United States and recognizing the contributions of Fort Gordon to Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom and its role as a pivotal communications training installation. Fort Gordon dates to 1940, when the United States Army recognized a need for a military installation near Augusta, Georgia that could aid in combat during the ensuing Second World War. The groundbreaking actually took place in 1941, and the base was originally named Camp Gordon after John B. Gordon, a general during the Civil War and former Governor of Georgia. During World War II, Camp Gordon was home to the 4th Infantry Division, 26th Infantry Division, and 10th Armored Division of the Army until they were deployed to Europe. However, in 1948, Camp Gordon became the home of the Signal Corps Training Center-- for which it is most commonly known today. Throughout the Korean war the need for signalmen grew, and the Signal Corps Training Center became the largest single source for Army communications specialists. Camp Gordon was also made a permanent installation in 1956 and was renamed Fort Gordon. Further, during the Vietnam war era and after, communications specialists became an absolutely necessary component of highly technological and modernized warfare, and Fort Gordon was recognized as an exemplary institution for these soldiers as the Signal Corps Training Center came to be known as the United States Army Signal Center at Fort Gordon. Fort Gordon and the troops and families stationed there were instrumental in Operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm, and during the 1990s the installation was responsible for training most of the DoD personnel who operate and maintain satellites, as well as training signal troops of allied and former nations. Currently, approximately 19,000 soldiers are stationed at Fort Gordon, and Augusta has been a welcome home to all of them. To this day, the base continues its tradition of success in the Signal Corps, as it trains soldiers for deployment into theater in Iraq and Afghanistan. On behalf of Georgia's 11th Congressional District, I am proud of the continued dedication to the safety and security of the United States of the men and women at Fort Gordon and thank them for their nearly 60 years of service to this Nation. Georgia has been blessed with an abundance of willing men and women who are committed to ensuring freedom and liberty for America, and I thank each of them for their service. I believe that the brave men and women at Fort Gordon and every military installation who sacrifice for our present freedoms deserve our fullest support. Our Nation's service men and women represent the best our country has to offer, and they must be treated with the respect and honor they deserve. As we ask these courageous soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines--and their families--to do more and more, it's only right we continue doing all we can for them. Commending the accomplishments and service of our troops at Fort Gordon is just one small example of the gratitude that every American should express to our troops at home and abroad. With that, Mr. Speaker, I ask all of my colleagues to support this resolution.

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I ask that you take a hard look at the economic challenges facing our country. Across the United States, unemployment is at a 26-year high, 10.2 percent, and more than 2.8 million jobs have been lost since the $1 trillion stimulus was signed into law last February without a single Republican vote in this House. In my home State of Georgia, eight out of the nine counties in my district have unemployment rates of 10 percent, and two counties are over 13 percent. Put simply, Mr. Speaker, my constituency needs jobs, and they need them now. Yet the Democratic plans on the economy, on health care, and on energy do the exact opposite. These plans raise taxes, and they sacrifice even more jobs. This is not the way to stimulate our economy and not the way to help my constituents. We need real solutions that will require tough choices in Washington. They involve tax relief for working Americans, and Republicans stand ready to work with you on that.

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this rule as well as the underlying bill, H.R. 4154, the Permanent Estate Tax Relief for Families, Farmers, and Small Businesses Act of 2009. In 2001, this Congress passed legislation that was signed into law by President Bush that provided significant estate tax relief for families. Before this action was taken, individuals who passed away could face up to a 55 percent tax for estates valued over $3 million. Additionally, if the value of those estates were between $10 million and $17 million, then the estates were hit with an additional 5 percent surtax, a grand total of 60 percent. Since the 2001 tax cuts have been enacted, the overall estate tax has been gradually reduced. For deaths that occur in 2009, the estate tax ceiling is 45 percent for estates valued over $1.5 million, but it allows up to $3.5 million in assets to be exempted. Furthermore, current law dictates, and rightfully so, that the estate tax will be completely repealed in 2010. Mr. Speaker, while a number of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle will claim that the estate tax in this bill will only affect the lavishly wealthy, the estate tax has the potential to drive a number of hardworking families, many of whom are small business owners, to liquidate assets and sell their businesses and farms that they have owned for generations. Clearly, this is not the intent of any form of an estate tax. And I don't believe that Rev. Rick Warren's remarks on ``Meet the Press'' this past Sunday were advocating that our children and our grandchildren should be born poor and die poor. I wholeheartedly believe that there should be no ``taxation without respiration,'' and I support a full repeal of the estate tax. Former Congressional Budget Office Director Douglas Holtz-Eakin issued a study earlier this year that indicated the long-term impact of eliminating the death tax would be to increase small business capital investment by $1.6 trillion and create up to 1.5 million jobs, something this country, Mr. Speaker, desperately needs. Unfortunately, this closed rule and underlying bill look to break the commitments made by Congress in 2001 by extending the estate tax at the 2009 level in perpetuity. And I am also concerned that although the exemption level is $3.5 million under H.R. 4154, it is not properly indexed for inflation and we could, therefore, find ourselves in a situation similar to the alternative minimum tax where individuals could inadvertently be subjected to the tax in the future. I urge all of my colleagues to defeat this rule. Let's go back and have an open debate, as the gentleman from Florida said, on the repeal of the estate tax. That is what we should do.

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. Madam Speaker, I rise today as a proud cosponsor of H. Res. 861, a resolution supporting the goals and ideals of National Military Family Month. The families of those who serve our country on the front lines deserve the admiration and appreciation of each and every citizen. These family members often watch their loved ones travel to faraway lands in support of a cause and an ideal so much greater than any one individual. The support given to our service men and women by their loved ones is irreplaceable, as it is the foundation for the bravery inherent in those who labor steadfastly in the defense of liberty. The men and women of the United States armed services rely on the support and encouragement of their families as they strive to protect the liberties and freedoms we enjoy every day at home. From the service organizations that provide holiday gifts to the letter that a parent or sibling writes to a loved one deployed or stationed abroad, the love and support of our military families is paramount. The sacrifices performed by these families should never be forgotten or diminished because they represent the very foundation of the American spirit. Let us also make certain that we remember those individuals who are in harm's way today in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as those who have paid the ultimate sacrifice--we are forever grateful for your heroic acts and for your service to our nation. The brave men, women, and families who have and continue to sacrifice for our present freedoms deserve our fullest support. These individuals represent our nation's finest qualities, and they must be treated with the utmost respect and honor. Recognizing the month of November as National Military Family Month is just one small token of our appreciation for the families and their sons, daughters, brothers, and sisters who labor steadfastly for the United States and its undying values of freedom and liberty for all. It is my hope that we will continue to do all we can and more for the members of our Armed Forces and their families. Madam Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to support this resolution.

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today as a proud cosponsor of H. Res. 742, a resolution recognizing the accomplishments of the 2009 Warner Robins Little League Softball World Championship Team. The Little League Softball World Series has long been a competitive outlet for our young women, providing them an arena for personal and athletic advancement. Their mission states, ``I trust in God. I love my country and will respect its laws. I will play fair and strive to win, but win or lose I will always do my best.'' No matter what the outcome for each team, I am positive that the opportunity to be a part of this competition is a valuable experience for every participant and provides them with memories that will last a lifetime. Today, however, I am pleased to recognize the victorious Warner Robins Little League Softball Championship Team as they defeated the Crawford, Texas Little League Softball Team to become the World Champions on August 19, 2009. This victory distinguishes the Warner Robins Little League as the first little league to claim a baseball and softball championship. On behalf of the 11th Congressional District of Georgia, it is my honor to congratulate the players, their coaches, and the managers who led them to this success. Your hard work and dedication have not only made you winners on the softball field, but will also be instrumental to your future successes. The 2009 Warner Robins Little League Softball Team is an example to America's youth of the values of teamwork and sportsmanship, and I urge all of my colleagues to support this resolution.

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. Representative Broun, Dr. Broun, I thank you very much. Before we move on, Mr. Speaker, to another subject that's hugely important, indeed, what we took up here today on the floor of our great House of Representatives, I just want to make one closing comment in regard to this issue of rationing of care and in particular in regard to this new recommendation to dumb down the care, indeed, the screening, for breast cancer. I don't know how to put it any other way than to say that it dumbs down that care and that opportunity for early detection and lives saved. Mr. Speaker, there are female Members of this body, great, great Members on both sides of the aisle, women that represent their districts all across this country that serve in this 435-Member House of Representatives. And, unfortunately, a number of them, a number of them have been stricken with breast cancer. In fact, Mr. Speaker, it may have even been before you were here that a Member on our side, a wonderful, wonderful Member from Virginia, struggled with her breast cancer for several years with great, great courage and fortitude and hopefulness and faithfulness, and God called her home. She died from the spread of that breast cancer. And it was such a sad day. And then I think of Members, Mr. Speaker, on your side of the aisle that at a young age, in their early 40s, have been stricken with breast cancer, women with beautiful young toddler children. I've seen them walking down the Hall of the Cannon Building, you know, a great Member, a great friend, but I'm very thankful for her that early detection occurred because of, I don't know, probably a combination of breast self-exam but maybe it was mammography, and we hope and pray and really feel very confident that our colleague has a complete cure. So when we bring up a subject like this, it's not to be morbid and not to scare people, Mr. Speaker, but just to inform in the reality and the unintended consequences sometimes of the things that we do. Particularly when we draft 2,000-page bills that you don't bring everybody together on both sides of the aisle in a bipartisan way and utilize the doctors, the doctors, not just the leadership and people that have been on these committees of jurisdiction for 30 years who write these bills in the dark of night and then just throw them out there in front of us and say you've got 24 hours to read it and vote up or down and, oh, by the way, you can't amend, it's a closed rule. It's wrong. It's wrong but it also is dangerous. Mr. Speaker, in the time that I have remaining, I want to shift gears a little bit because today on the floor of the House the main thing that we dealt with was a bill called H.R. 3961. Now, the number is insignificant really except to look it up on the Internet, but let's call it what most people would recognize it as, certainly most physicians, all physicians across the country would understand, the ``doc fix'' bill. The ``doc fix'' bill. Our physicians for the last 15-or-so years, maybe more, maybe closer to 20 years, but there is a flawed formula for calculating how much they are reimbursed for the procedures that are done under the Medicare program. And for the last at least 6 or 7 years when you calculate that formula--we'll call it for abbreviation purposes the SGR formula, sustainable growth rate--and every year for the last 6 or 7, the calculation says you doctors who are just barely breaking even, maybe not even breaking even, maybe losing money, seeing Medicare patients out of the goodness and compassion of your heart, for which we commend you, are going to have to take next year a 5 percent cut, and then we calculate it and then the next year a 4\1/2\ percent cut, and on and on and on. Well, each year over the last several years, we have come in and passed a law that would say we're going to mitigate that cut for this year, and we're going to let you get reimbursed on the basis of what you got last year and we're going to bump it up 1 percent or .5 percent or whatever, and we're going to do that for a couple of years. We literally are going to kick the can, kick the can down the road, Mr. Speaker. You know that expression. Because that's what we're doing. Maybe we kick it soccer style. But the problem doesn't really go away. So the next time in the aggregate, instead of a 5 percent cut, you've got a 10 percent cut or a 15 percent cut. Indeed, January 1, 2010, in the aggregate that cut will be 21 percent if we don't do something about it. Well, Mr. Speaker, what the Democratic majority and what President Obama said to the American Medical Association way back in June is in this bill, this health reform act that we're going to pass that we're going to totally reform one-fifth of our economy, we're going to have in there a permanent fix for the doctors. We're going to solve the problem. And, doctors, also we know you have another concern. Mr. Speaker, you're aware of this. My colleagues, I know are aware of it. You doctors have this concern over medical malpractice and this need to defend yourself against these frivolous lawsuits by ordering all these tests on patients that are not only unnecessary but indeed could be downright dangerous to the patient, but yet you keep doing them because you don't want to be dragged into a court of law and have some slick attorney or some expert witness hired by some very capable, smart attorney saying, Oh, yes, this doctor practiced below the standard of care because he didn't order a fizzle phosphate level, whatever the heck that is. So I was so thrilled when Mr. President said to the AMA, Mr. Speaker, that there would be medical liability reform. We would solve the low payment based on that flawed formula, SGR, and we would at last have medical liability reform. This bill, 3962, that we passed last Saturday night had none of that in there, and the Democratic majority just took out the ``doc fix'' because, guess what. To do it costs about $290 billion, Mr. Speaker, and would push the cost of this massive monstrosity of a bill over the $900 billion, which the President had put a cap on, a ceiling, and said he wouldn't sign anything that cost more than $900 billion. I say even if you pay for something that costs $900 billion, if the final result is an Edsel, you have not accomplished very much. But, indeed, the bill was pulled out and the President and Ms. Pelosi said, basically, not to worry, not to worry. We're going to come and we're going to introduce this bill as a stand-alone, and indeed that's what we did today, 3961, and we're going to pass it. But you know what? It ain't paid for. And whether it costs $210 billion, $230 billion, $275 billion, I'm not sure of the exact figure, but it's north of $200 billion, and my Georgia Tech math tells me that that's about a quarter of a trillion dollars. It's going to cost that much money and we're not going to pay for it. The debt now is something like $12 trillion. So we're going to add another quarter-trillion dollars to the debt. In fact, we're going to even have to add to the debt ceiling because we're going beyond what the law allows us to do. So, Mr. Speaker, my side of the aisle looked at this very carefully, particularly the physician Members, the 13 of us that form the GOP Doctors House Caucus. And we said, you know, we want to do right by our doctors and we want to do right by our patients and we want to do right by the country, and we can fix this and we can pay for it. So we had one opportunity today to offer a motion to recommit with our design of how we pay the doctors a 2 percent increase every year for the next 4 years under Medicare and we pay for it. And the way we pay for it, Mr. Speaker, in that motion to recommit, is to have that medical liability reform in the bill among a couple of other things to generate revenue, and it's revenue that the CBO says is at least $54 billion. So our motion to recommit, our bill, on ``doc fix'' is paid for. It's a real ``doc fix.'' But you know what, Mr. Speaker? You were here. All my colleagues were here. We got ruled out of order. The Chair said our motion to recommit was nongermane because H.R. 3961, the Democrats' ``doc fix'' bill, the $290 billion not-paid-for bill, well, we weren't consistent with that because we paid for our bill; therefore, it was nongermane. Now, what can kind of idiocy, what kind of idiocy is that, Mr. Speaker and my colleagues? This is something the American people need to understand, and certainly I think the doctors understand. We had an opportunity to do this and do it right, and we were denied even to vote on that motion to recommit. It was tremendously disappointing to me because, Mr. Speaker, I had the opportunity, the privilege, the distinction of offering that motion to recommit, and I wanted to explain to my colleagues exactly what our bill does. And the chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee denied me the opportunity even to speak, getting the Chair to rule that our motion to recommit was nongermane. So every time I tried to speak, I was gaveled down. Mr. Speaker, that's not what the American people want. If we were in the leadership, they would be appalled. I think they're appalled tonight with your party in the leadership. The American people don't want that. They want Members to have an opportunity to represent their districts, to represent their principles, and to represent and fight for this country and not be silenced. And that's what happened on this floor today. And it's got to stop, Mr. Speaker. It's got to stop. And we will continue to fight. This bill that was passed here today, there was not--I think there may have been one Republican that voted for it, and there were 9 Democrats that voted against it. So there was bipartisan opposition. But your party, Mr. Speaker, had the votes, and you passed it. But it's a sham of a bill, and you know it, because the Senate, 3 weeks ago, totally rejected the bill with 14 Democratic Senators voting no. They couldn't even get a cloture vote. That bill is dead on arrival when it gets to the Senate. Our bill had an opportunity to pass and get to the President's desk and give the doctors relief for the next 4 years, at least. But, no. We had to do it the same old same old way of forcing things on the American people. It's not right, Mr. Speaker, and it's not going to stand. I appreciate the opportunity, as I said at the outset, to come and to talk about this with my colleagues, because I only had 5 minutes to speak about our motion to recommit this afternoon. Five minutes to explain, not hyperbole, not harsh rhetoric, just to explain what our bill did in contrast to 3961, the majority bill, which, as I say, is not going anywhere and the Democratic leadership knows it's not going anywhere. So it is a sham. It's not a ``Doc Fix,'' it's a ``Doc Trick.'' And I want to be, as I move to wrap up, I want my colleagues to just look at this one chart, one poster that I have to show. And this is my depiction of a Trojan horse. And you might not can read this writing, but on the Trojan horse is a saddle, and it says, the Democratic ``Doc Fix'' Bill, H.R. 3961. But on the back of the horse you see the overall health care reform act, the Pelosi Health reform act of 2009, yes, with the $500 billion cuts to our precious seniors under the Medicare program, kind of slipping right on in there. That Trojan horse is this democratic ``Doc Fix.'' But when they, and if they, and I hope and pray to God, Mr. Speaker, that it doesn't pass, but if it does, this is what's going to happen to the American people, not only to our doctors, but to our patients and especially to our seniors. With that, Mr. Speaker, I want to yield a little time to my great friend from Texas, Judge Louie Gohmert.

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. I think Mr. Reagan said it right. ``Trust but verify.'' The verification is yet to come.

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. I thank the gentleman from east Texas so much for being with me tonight. Mr. Speaker, as I bring this to a conclusion, let me just say that we hear the term all the time in the military about collateral damage, and we worry about it. Every time we fire a rocket or use a predator drone to get the really bad guys, we worry about collateral damage. Well, we should be just as worried about collateral damage in the social programs that we are enacting up here as the representatives of the people, especially when it's dealing with health care, because in both instances, both in the military and socially, the collateral damage can result in lost lives. We're talking serious business here. We will continue to fight for the right thing. With that, Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. Reclaiming just for a second on this point. The gentleman from Texas, Mr. Speaker, is so right. And to do this, of course, now they're going to have--they're going to go over the current debt ceiling by law. They're within, I think, $70 billion of the current debt ceiling, so they're going to have to, in the next couple of weeks, before Christmas, they're going to have to increase the debt ceiling once again. And you know what? That's not going to be a stand-alone bill, because they don't want that, the light of day to shine on that. That's going to be embedded in something else, is it not, my friend?

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, the gentleman from Texas is dead on. He's absolutely right. This 3961, the so-called ``Doc Fix,'' and Representative Gohmert and I agree, it's a ``Doc Trick.'' It mitigates the 21 percent cut that's coming due January 1st. And it gives a positive update, I think, of 1 percent for 1 year. But then after that, Mr. Speaker, here comes the trick that Judge Gohmert was talking about. There's going to be a formula, a new formula, not the SGR, but this new formula, based on GDP. So if you're a primary doc and you're doing examinations, histories and physicals in your office, so-called ``evaluation and management,'' you get GDP plus 2 percent. But if you're a specialist, like I was, an OB-GYN or, say, a urologist or general surgeon, it's going to be GDP plus 1 percent. Well, if the GDP is a negative number, then here again the doctors have no confidence that they're going to get paid a decent reimbursement for their services. So indeed, it is a trick. It is not a fix. Mr. Speaker, I want to take an opportunity--we've been joined by our good friend from Missouri, who has been with us on a number of occasions on health care and other issues, and I want to yield to him some time. And I'll yield to the gentleman, Representative Todd Akin from Missouri.

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. I have heard it said, ``I'm here from the government. Trust me. I'm here to help you.''

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. After we don't pay.