Doc Hastings

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, after I made my opening remarks, my friend from Florida stood up and said that I was on message, and I thank him very, very much for the compliment because I was talking about something that the American people clearly, clearly are concerned about, and that is the high energy costs and particularly the high prices of gasoline. So I think, Mr. Speaker, it's time for the House to debate ideas for lowering prices at the pump and for addressing the skyrocketing price of gasoline. By defeating the previous question, the House will have that opportunity. If the previous question is defeated, I will move to amend the rule, not rewrite the rule, just amend the rule, to make in order and allow the House to consider H.R. 5656, introduced by Representative Hensarling of Texas. If this House has time to spend several hours debating Indian land claims and new casinos in Michigan, then it certainly has time to debate the high price of gasoline. It's time we start producing more American-made energy. Our country can't afford the knee-jerk, no-to- any-drilling-in-America approach that the liberal leaders of this House still cling to. The citizens of our country can't afford a Congress that does nothing. It's time for this House to act, and defeating the previous question will allow us to do so. So, Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to have the text of the amendment and extraneous material inserted into the Record prior to the vote on the previous question.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Campbell).

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, thank you for the opportunity to speak in support of H.R. 2245, my bill to name the Department of Veterans Affairs community-based outpatient clinic in Wenatchee, Washington in honor of Elwood ``Bud'' Link. Bud joined the Navy in 1941 and served on the destroyer USS Tracy that aided U.S. forces at Guadalcanal, Okinawa, and elsewhere in the Pacific. He was one of many residents of north central Washington who were called to serve their country during World War II. However, Bud's support for his Nation didn't stop when his military service ended. As an active member of the local Cashmere Veterans of Foreign Wars post, Bud was a dedicated advocate for increased hometown health care. He experienced firsthand the long distances north central Washington veterans had to travel for even the most basic health care. In 2001, the Cashmere-Leavenworth VFW passed a motion to research the need for a VA clinic, and Bud quickly took the lead. He became a tireless proponent of bringing a veterans outpatient clinic to north central Washington. Bud was instrumental in keeping the local veterans motivated, active and informed about how to successfully make a clinic a reality. He championed the clinic until his death in 2003. For several years I worked with Bud Link and local veterans to make the case for a new clinic in north central Washington and press the VA when the project faced delays. Our hard work paid off in 2006 when the Secretary of Veterans Affairs approved a new clinic. And, in 2007 I was very proud to attend the grand opening of the new VA clinic in Wenatchee. As a tribute to Bud's work to support hometown health care for rural Washington state veterans, Senator Patty Murray and I introduced legislation to name the clinic in Bud's honor. This bill has the endorsement of the local community, the entire Washington state Congressional delegation, the Washington state Chapters of the Paralyzed Veterans of America, the American Legion, the Disabled American Veterans, and the Vietnam Veterans of America. By officially naming this clinic in Wenatchee after Bud, we are paying respect to a local veteran who fought for the quality care his fellow veterans deserve. I would like to thank Bud's wife, Helen, for her steadfast support of Bud's efforts. I would also like to thank the members of the Cashmere- Leavenworth VFW for their work to organize the local community in support of the clinic. Finally, I would like to thank Chairman Filner and Ranking Member Buyer for their work to bring this bill to the floor today. I strongly encourage my colleagues to support H.R. 2245. Through this bill we are recognizing the heroic efforts of Bud Link and his work to improve the health care of his fellow veterans.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Madam Speaker, if I could inquire of my friend from New York, I have no requests for time and I'm prepared to yield back if the gentleman is prepared to close.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. With that, Madam Speaker, I yield back my time.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Madam Speaker, I am very pleased to be able to urge my colleagues to support this rule and the underlying bipartisan bill to update our Nation's Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Since the Protect America Act expired in February, our Nation has been relying on an outdated 1970s law to monitor foreign persons in foreign places who seek to do our Nation's citizens harm. At long last, Madam Speaker, the House will be permitted to vote on a bipartisan bill that our Nation's intelligence leaders are confident will allow them to do their jobs without costly delays and mountains of paperwork. This bill is not perfect, but it takes vital steps to modernize FISA to reflect 21st century cell phone and Internet technology, and to protect our Nation from today's determined and sophisticated terrorist threats. In February, 68 Senators voted to pass a bipartisan compromise. Yet, ever since that overwhelming bipartisan Senate vote, the liberal leaders of this House have refused to allow a vote because they knew a majority would pass it. Republicans tried for months to advance the bipartisan Senate compromise to a vote in the House, but we were blocked time after time. Today, this blockade will be broken when Democrats join Republicans in voting to pass the bipartisan FISA modernization bill. So Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote for this rule and the underlying bill. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Madam Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. Arcuri) for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself as much time as I may consume. (Mr. HASTINGS of Washington asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, on June 8, the New York Times published a story that raised questions about Senators that amended legislation to protect home State hospitals from a new move in this Congress to ban doctor-owned hospitals. The article labeled these actions as ``special interest'' and questioned their appropriateness. It cited specific Senators, including a senior Senator from my State of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I'm not familiar with the circumstances surrounding each hospital in the article, but I am very familiar with Wenatchee Valley Medical Center and efforts being undertaken by those who represented in Congress to protect this institution from the threat of a government- forced closure or sale. The criticism leveled against the Washington State Senator in the New York Times article is unjustified and totally without merit. Senator Murray's action to protect the Wenatchee Valley Medical Center was entirely appropriate. In fact, it's what this Nation's citizens should expect from their elected representatives. Mr. Speaker, it's troubling that the targets of scrutiny are those who are standing up and who are protecting their constituents and not those seeking to force the closure or sale of a hometown hospital system simply because it is doctor-owned. The Wenatchee Valley Medical Center and its seven clinics serve a rural population, in my State, of a quarter of a million people in an area the size of the State of Maryland. The medical center accepts all patients regardless of their ability to pay, and it has a long record of providing quality care. Today, it is jointly owned by 150 doctors. For this simple reason, it is a target for some who think doctor ownership should be banned. Twice in this Congress House Democrats have passed bills that would outlaw the Wenatchee Valley Medical Center as it exists today, not because of any poor care or bad behavior by its doctors but simply because it is owned by doctors. I offered amendments to both bills. Some of my amendments would have stopped the ban on doctor-owned hospitals. Others would have altered the ban to protect the Wenatchee Valley Medical Center. Unfortunately, House Democrat leaders blocked every one from even being debated and voted on the floor of the House. These same House leaders also swept aside the objections and concerns of at least eleven Democrats who have spoken out against this proposal and the harm it would cause to their local hospitals. When I last spoke on the House floor against such legislation, I asked the Democrat chairman of the Energy and Commerce Health Subcommittee if he would work with me to exempt the few existing doctor-owned hospitals that would be impacted in both Democrat and Republican districts. He replied, ``The answer is no.'' The Democrat chairman of the Ways and Means Subcommittee on Health was quoted by the New York Times as saying, ``He would prefer not to exempt any doctor-owned hospitals.'' When the Federal Government dictates that doctors can't own a hospital, Mr. Speaker, this is a step towards a Canadian-style, government-run health care system under which the Federal Government decides where, when, how, and even if Americans get care. This means Americans could be faced with waiting lists and rationing and bureaucrats, not doctors, making decisions about their health. With those who control the House intent and insistent on banning doctor-owned hospitals, at a minimum, protection must be given to allow existing facilities like the Wenatchee Valley Medical Center to continue serving patients like it has, Mr. Speaker, for 60 years. Being 1 out of 100, the powers of an individual Senator are considerable. Senator Murray used her committee position to add language protecting the Wenatchee Valley Medical Center to legislation that included the ban on doctor-owned hospitals. Mr. Speaker, she has done the right thing. Despite what may have been printed in the New York Times, I will keep working with Senators Murray and Cantwell and Congresswoman McMorris Rodgers to fully protect the Wenatchee Valley Medical Center. I reject any notion that what Senator Murray has done is anything but appropriate and necessary, and I commend her for her actions.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Madam Speaker, I will reserve my time.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Madam Speaker, how much time again remains on both sides?

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Madam Speaker, it is an unfortunate spectacle to see the leaders of this Congress manipulate the extension of unemployment benefits into a partisan weapon and a diversion from their failure to do anything about the skyrocketing price of gasoline and diesel. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle want the American people to believe that Republicans are mean, uncaring and opposed to providing help to unemployed workers as they look for a job. I am certain, Madam Speaker, that Democrat after Democrat will come to the House floor and attempt to paint this cartoon view of the world. But nothing, Madam Speaker, is further from the truth. It is Republicans who have been trying for weeks, months and years to overcome the near monolithic Democrat opposition to producing more American-made energy, which will increase the oil supply and lower prices at the pump to keep our economy working. The high cost of gasoline is affecting families, workers and businesses in every town in this country, and this Democrat Congress does nothing. Let me state for the record that Republicans not only believe in the importance and value of unemployment benefits and that we support extension of benefits in times of needs, but that it was a Republican Congress and President that last enacted unemployment benefit extensions in 2003, and I supported and voted for those extensions. Yet the liberal leaders of this Congress decided to bring an unemployment benefit extension bill to the House floor that purposely undermines the bipartisan, responsible manner in which extensions have been enacted for the past 27 years, going all the way back to 1981. Democrat leaders decided to change the rules and to do it while blocking every single Representative, Republican or Democrat, from being able to come to the floor of the House and offer their suggestions for improving unemployment insurance or better directing benefits to those Americans or those communities in our country that are most in need. As written in this bill, Madam Speaker, Democrats have mutated the requirements for receiving benefits so that an individual could work for just 2 weeks and then get an entire year's worth of unemployment benefits. Madam Speaker, giving 365 days worth of benefit checks for having worked just 14 days violates most Americans' sense of fairness. There is a big difference between providing a leg up and giving a handout, and I think this bill crosses that line. This bill also gives an extra 13 weeks of unemployment benefits to States where the unemployment rate is incredibly low, below 3 percent. Instead of focusing benefit extensions to where it is needed, this bill gives it to places where it is not. As I said, Democrats have chosen to mutate the way unemployment benefit extensions have been done for the past 27 years so that they can try to score political points. But Democrats have also decided it is okay to break the promises they made to the American people in just the last election. One of the promises that Democrat leaders spoke about the loudest and most often was their commitment to what is known as PAYGO, or pay-as- you-go. Under the promise made by Democrat leaders, a new rule was written in the House at the start of this Congress to prevent any bill from passing that wasn't budget neutral, that didn't offset new spending with spending cuts or tax increases. Madam Speaker, Democrats are not keeping that promise on this bill. On this bill, they are waiving PAYGO rules. They are now saying that the PAYGO rule they wrote and the promise they made to the American people can be ignored whenever it is convenient or expedient. Madam Speaker, my purpose in raising the issue of PAYGO rules being violated is not to use it as an argument against the extension of unemployment benefits, but to point out the broken promises and hypocrisy of the liberal leaders of this Congress. They claim it is okay to ignore PAYGO because American people pay unemployment insurance tax out of every paycheck, so it is the American people's own money that is paying for the bill. Well, when it comes to income tax increases, that is the American people's money too. Yet it was just 2 days ago that the Democrat majority leader flat out declared that Americans will face billions of dollars of tax increases this year if expiring tax rates aren't offset by PAYGO rules. Madam Speaker, the leaders of this House are using PAYGO to hold hostage tax relief legislation that would prevent 25 million Americans from having their taxes go up by an average of $2,000 next April to pay the AMT tax. They are holding an extension of the State sales tax deduction hostage under PAYGO rules by requiring taxes to be increased so that the residents of sales tax States, like my State, can be treated as fairly and equally as residents of income tax States. For the leaders of this Congress, PAYGO is an excuse to raise taxes by billions of dollars, but PAYGO can be ignored when they mutate long-standing unemployment benefits to allow someone who works just 2 weeks, just 2 weeks, to get an entire year's worth of benefits checks. This extension of unemployment benefits is labeled as an emergency, as an emergency, because unemployment rose from 5 to 5.5 percent last month. It's stated that this is the largest 1-month increase in two decades and so Congress must now pass legislation. This 1-month increase of 10 percent is justification for urgent, immediate action that this House and the Senate must clear all other schedules and vote to pass this legislation without delay. That's what has been said. Where is the same level of urgency and need for immediate action on gas prices? Gas prices have gone up over 10 percent in the last month. Americans aren't just paying the highest gas prices in the past two decades, they are paying the highest prices ever, ever, recorded in the history of this country? Almost every day the price of gasoline sets a new record. Since Democrats took control of Congress the price of gasoline has gone up over 75 percent. At the pace that prices are climbing, it may only be a matter of time until they have doubled, doubled, while this liberal Congress does nothing. I absolutely agree that losing one's job is a painful experience and that it deserves the attention of Congress. But the pain of filling up your gas tank is felt by every American, whether they just lost their job or not. The pain of skyrocketing gas prices is hurting all Americans, all Americans, yet this liberal Congress does nothing to help increase the supply of gasoline to lower prices at the pump. Time after time Democrats have blocked real solutions for more American-made energy by increasing oil and gas production and refining here, right here, in America. America has billions of barrels of oil reserves and trillions of cubic feet of natural gas, but Democrats insist on keeping it off limits. We are not allowed to make our own energy, and so the prices continue to climb. How long will Speaker Pelosi and this liberal Congress refuse to act to increase supply and lower gas prices? How high do prices have to go before they stop blockading America from tapping its own resources? There were thousands of oil-drilling rigs in the Gulf of Mexico that weathered two back-to-back Category 5 hurricanes, Rita and Katrina, and not one single rig ruptured. America has the resources and safe technology to produce oil for years, but Democrats refuse to allow it. Eighty-six percent of congressional Democrats have opposed more American-made energy, while 91 percent of Republicans have supported producing more energy right here in our own country. If this Congress is serious about addressing economic pain, then they need to get serious about gas prices and stop blocking real solutions. For months Republicans have tried to force this House, and for months Democrats have refused to act. Meanwhile, the price of gas and diesel just goes up and up and up. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Madam Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. Arcuri) for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mr. HASTINGS of Washington asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of the time. Madam Speaker, the idea here is to take care of those that have lost their jobs by extending unemployment benefits. The idea is to get a bill to the President that he will sign. As the gentleman from Illinois said, this bill has been waiting now for 8 weeks before it has been brought to the floor, but the bill, in its present form, will not be signed because it has changed 27 years of bipartisan support on extending unemployment benefits. So I think that we need to go back to the drawing board, if you will, and get a bill that we know that the President will sign. But more importantly, more importantly, we need to get our economy going again. And so it's time, in my mind, for the House to debate ideas for lowering gas prices to get the economy going again. I'm going to ask my colleagues to defeat the previous question so that the House can consider H.R. 3089, the No More Excuses energy bill. By defeating the previous question, the House will still be able to act on the unemployment benefit extension bill, but the House will also be able to finally act on legislation that will create more American-made energy and jobs to increase the supply of gas by producing more gas and producing more gas here in our Nation. It will increase the supply and decrease the price at the pump. Skyrocketing prices need the attention of this Congress, and we've got to act. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to have the text of the amendment and extraneous material inserted in the Record prior to the vote on the previous question.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to defeat the previous question so this House can get serious about rising gas prices so we can start producing American-made gasoline. With that, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Madam Speaker, I continue to reserve.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Madam Speaker, I continue to reserve.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. I would ask my friend from New York how many speakers he has.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Madam Speaker, I have 3 minutes left; is that correct?

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Madam Speaker, I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. I will reserve my time so that we can equal the time out here.

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. And the opposition that the constituents in my area are concerned about is this 2-week window. That is where the issue is.