Steny Hoyer

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Can the Chair tell me whether the CBO has scored the American Health Care Act, which is currently being marked up in the Ways and Means Committee?

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I regret that the Speaker will not respond.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I have a parliamentary inquiry of the Chair.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, the Republicans released a bill last night. That bill deals with every American's welfare--every American's welfare--every child's welfare in this country. None of them were able to testify before the committee, before the committee marks it up on Wednesday. None of them were able to come to that committee and say how it will affect them or their families or their fellow citizens. None of them were able to testify as to the benefits of the Affordable Care Act for them, their families, their children, and their neighbors. None of them will have been able to read and digest the bill. Mr. Speaker, last night, after locking it away in a basement for days, and just as reporters were leaving to go home, Republicans released the text of their legislation to repeal the Affordable Care Act. The country has been waiting for 7 years for the Republican replacement, for the Republican alternative, for the Republicans to redeem their promise of a better plan, a better way to ensure the security of having health care that is affordable and available to each American and to their families and their children. Republicans have been promising, since the enactment of the Affordable Care Act in 2010, that they would repeal it entirely and enact something better. They don't repeal it entirely, and they don't offer something better, something that covers more Americans and lowers costs to consumers. For 7 years, they have said we have a better plan. Last night, they revealed the inaccuracy of that representation; the bait-and-switch, if you will, of that representation; the pretense to their conservatives who have voted some 65 times to repeal the Affordable Care Act that they were not going to offer a bill that did that, notwithstanding the fact that they said that is what they are going to do. The legislation they introduced would repeal, of course, some parts of the Affordable Care Act and replace them with policies that will take health coverage away, take health care away from millions of Americans and make millions of others pay more for less. President Trump, just the other day from that rostrum, promised the American people that the Republican plan would ``have insurance for everybody.'' That was not true. Neither the House Republicans nor the Senate Republicans nor President Trump have offered such a plan, and the plan that was revealed last night does not fulfill that representation. Mr. Speaker, it should not surprise us, however, that our President says things that prove to be not accurate. He also said from that rostrum that the policies would be far less expensive and far better than they are now. This bill does not do that, and the President has offered no bill that does that. This plan fails that representation miserably. It increases healthcare costs for middle class families in order to pay for tax breaks for the wealthiest, who don't need them to afford health care. We should not penalize people for becoming wealthy. We applaud their success. But we should not subsidize health care for those of us who can afford our health care while those who cannot are left to fend for themselves. In other words, the Republicans are once again saying you are on your own. Their bill also raids the Medicare trust fund, threatening its long- term solvency. In fact, the affordable care added to the life expectancy of Medicare. The bill that the Republicans have put forward imposes severe cuts to Medicaid as well. It forces States and healthcare providers to carry the burden of the uninsured while taking away funding for expanded Medicaid. Their bill requires States to ration care by throwing those with preexisting conditions into ``sick pools,'' with higher premiums, higher deductibles, and waiting periods for coverage. And what services would be available under Medicaid? Their plan replaces the individual responsibility requirement which, by the way, Mr. Speaker, as you may well know, was the proposal of The Heritage Foundation. The Heritage Action for America, which is the political arm of the foundation, opposes the Republican bill. Not for the same reason I do, but because they believe it continues much of what ACA tried to do in protecting Americans in a plan that was initially proposed by The Heritage Foundation and adopted by Governor Romney in Massachusetts. Unbelievably, Mr. Speaker, Republicans won't even tell the American people how much this legislation will cost and what its impact will be on consumers' wallets and on our insurance markets. How do you do that? You have hearings, you listen to people, you listen to their experiences now, you listen to what their needs are, and you listen to those who have the greatest experience on their view of what the impact of this legislation will be. There have been no such hearings and none are planned. Republicans know that millions of Americans will lose coverage under their legislation: those covered under Medicaid, the health insurance exchanges, and even those with employer-based insurance. That is why, Mr. Speaker, in my opinion, they are rushing to see this bill put in force before it is illuminated by the light of day and before the American people find out how they will be impacted. Thankfully, Mr. Speaker, it will be difficult for House Republicans to enact their bill into law, not only because of the extreme opposition to those proposals by the American people, as we have seen in townhall meeting after townhall meeting after townhall meeting across this country, but also because the House and Senate Republicans are already rejecting it. It is not certain that House Republicans can even reach a majority in this House on their legislation. The head of the Republican Study Committee, the largest group of Republicans, has said this bill is not acceptable. The gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Meadows), the head of the Freedom Caucus, has said this bill does not repeal the Affordable Care Act, which is his objective and the objective of the Freedom Caucus. Senator Cruz has said that as well. Senator Paul has said that as well. Senator Lee has said that as well. One thing is clear, however, Mr. Speaker, House Republicans are going to have to find the votes on their own to dismantle the protections incorporated in the Affordable Care Act that the American people now have. Is the Affordable Care Act perfect? It is not. Should we have spent the last 6 years trying to make it work as well as it possibly can? Yes, we should have. Were we able to do that? No. The only alternative the Republican Party offered to the American people and to this House was to repeal. Not to replace, not to repair, not to fix, not to make sure it was more affordable and more available to the American people so that we would be a healthier and stronger nation. Their only option was to repeal. Mr. Speaker, I urge Republican leaders to withdraw this bill. Let us work together to ensure what almost every Member says they want, and that is a healthcare program in America that is affordable by all, available to all, and enjoyed by all. That is what President Trump said at that rostrum just days ago. This bill that the Republicans are going to mark up on Wednesday does not do what they say or what President Trump said. The American people will oppose it, and we will reflect their opposition in this House. But we are available to our Republican colleagues in good faith to work together to ensure that what the President said--available to all, at a lower price, with everybody having access--we will support that bill, if it exists, and we will work with our Republican colleagues to pass it and give that protection and security to the American people. Mr. Speaker, I note that there have not been many Republicans to speak this morning. I understand that one Republican spoke about this bill. I am amazed if they think this is a better way. I am amazed if they think this will do a better job than the Affordable Care Act. I am amazed if they think they are going to bring costs down and care up, and that we don't have a lot of Republicans, Mr. Speaker, coming to this floor and claiming victory. They are not here because they can't claim that victory. Let's reject this bill, Mr. Speaker. Let's work together. We can do better. The American people expect us to do better.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Is the majority leader not aware of whether there will be a markup on the bill or will it come directly to the floor through the Rules Committee?

Mr. HOYER. The gentleman just indicated that this will be the bill that we passed last year.

Mr. HOYER. So I am correct, then, that the bill will be the same bill that we passed last year? Is that accurate?

Mr. HOYER. The majority leader may not know, and I certainly understand that. We will see what differences might exist. If there are any substantive changes in the bill, we would hope that it would be subjected to a hearing or at least a markup. But the gentleman believes there is no substantive change. Is that accurate?

Mr. HOYER. Do you know when it will be marked up? I yield to the gentleman from California.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I rise for the purpose of inquiring of the majority leader the schedule for the week to come, I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. McCarthy), the majority leader and my friend.

Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for that information. The gentleman mentions the Defense Appropriations bill is going to be brought forward. It is my understanding that the text was just introduced this morning. Is that accurate?

Mr. HOYER. I thank the majority leader for that observation. I agree with the majority leader that subjecting the Defense Appropriations or any other appropriation is not a tenable or appropriate policy to pursue. The gentleman knows we were for an omnibus being passed in 2016, as an omnibus was passed in 2015, which, therefore, gives the administrators of any agency or Secretaries of any agency the opportunity to have the ability to plan over a period of time longer than months. So I certainly agree. But very frankly, I want to tell the majority leader, on our side of the aisle we are very, very concerned that privilege will be accorded to the defense bill. Can the majority leader tell me whether or not we intend to adopt and pass, in the regular order, individual bills--the Labor-Health bill, the Interior bill, the Agriculture bill, et cetera, et cetera--in a similar manner? That means considering them on their merits discretely, separately, individually. I yield to the gentleman from California.

Mr. HOYER. I appreciate that, Mr. Leader, if that is your goal; and I hope that, in fact, we can pursue that goal. Very frankly, we believe that the scenario is being set up to take care of the defense bill. I voted for the defense bill. I was one of those people. I intend to vote for the defense bill next week when it comes to the floor, if, in fact, as the gentleman represents, it is substantively the same as the bill that we have already adopted. What I am concerned about and what Members on my side of the aisle are very concerned about is that the remaining nondefense discretionary spending bills will be substantially altered from that which we would have passed in December of last year in the 2017. Of course, we were 4 months late doing that--or 3 months late, at least: October, November, and December. But I am hopeful, Mr. Leader, that those bills will, in fact, be considered discretely so that the American public can see us vote on those bills and on the priorities that are incorporated in those bills. Mr. Leader, it appears that the majority has stalled somewhat in their efforts in a path forward on repeal of the ACA. President Trump's address on Tuesday, it seems to me, didn't offer many details. He does say, however, that everybody is going to be covered--everybody--with better health care, cheaper. If that bill comes to the floor, I am going to vote for it, Mr. Leader. I want you to know that. Health care for everybody-- quality, accessible, affordable, and cheaper. Now, as the majority leader knows, the budget resolution that was passed this year set a deadline of January 27 for committees to report legislation repealing the law. It is now March 2, and there are reports, Mr. Leader, that Republicans have a draft bill that perhaps is located in H-157, that it is not being posted, and that Republicans have been told they can view it in H-157. I don't know that I have the room number correct, and I am not sure that the information that I have is correct, but I will tell you that Michael Burgess, or Dr. Burgess, on your side of the aisle said this. He said it yesterday: People need to have access to this document-- apparently his presumption was he did not have access to the document or he believed others should; not only Members of our side of the aisle, but also the public--and if there are problems, let's talk through them. It's been a long time in the works. Most of the pieces that are in there, people have seen in the past, but it does need to be an open process. Mr. Leader, let me repeat that. It does need to be an open process, according to Dr. Burgess. Gus Bilirakis says: We're not having a hearing or anything. We're not having a hearing or anything. But there'll be a place for us to view it, the draft. Paul Ryan, the Speaker, said, 3 days ago: We're going through the committee process. We're doing this step by step. We're having public hearings. We're having committee work on legislation. This is how the legislative process is supposed to be designed. We are not hatching some bill in a back room--perhaps H-157; he didn't say that, I said it--and plopping it on the American people's front door. Mr. Leader, you and I both were here when the Affordable Care Act was passed. There was a lot of talk about the Affordable Care Act and how it was passed in the dark of night. That was baloney, of course. We had 79 bipartisan hearings and markups over the 2 years that we considered the Affordable Care Act. House Members spent nearly 100 hours in hearings, heard from 181 witnesses from both sides of the aisle, considered 239 amendments--both Democratic and Republican--and accepted 121 amendments. The original House bill was posted online 30 days before the first committee began their markup and more than 100 days before the committee introduced their merged bill in the House. House Democrats posted the House bill--that was the final process--online 72 hours before the bill was brought to the floor, consistent with our rules. Now, to my understanding, the Ways and Means Committee has been told this bill is going to be marked up on Wednesday. There will not have been a single hearing, there will not have been a single witness, and Members cannot, on our side of the aisle--as I understand it--see the bill today. I don't know where all my Tea Party friends are who demanded full consideration and that everybody read the bill. I don't see them out on the lawn. I don't see them out on the plaza. I don't see them out on the sidewalk as they were when we were considering the bill and we had those 181 witnesses, the 100 hours of hearings that they thought weren't sufficient. I don't know whether they will think that having a markup next Wednesday when the bill has not even been made available to Democratic Members of the House. Apparently, Republican Members have to go to a room to see it, and the public clearly has no idea of what that bill is. Mr. Leader, I hope you will tell me that I am wrong, that there will be hearings consistent with what Speaker Ryan said 3 days ago. I hope you will tell me, yes, we are going to honor what Speaker Ryan said, that we are going to have those hearings, we are going to have witnesses, and we are going to consider amendments. All of us understand that this is one of the biggest issues confronting the American people. We have had hundreds of thousands of people showing up at town meetings saying how concerned they are, yet, if my information is correct, Mr. Leader, they will have no opportunity to talk to the Committee on Ways and Means. I am further informed, and I hope the majority leader says this is wrong, that the markup will occur before the Congressional Budget Office has the opportunity to say how much it is going to cost. All this weeping and gnashing of teeth about balanced budgets and fiscal responsibility, a bill that affects 18 percent of the gross domestic product, and the critical need for people to have access to affordable, quality health care, not one of them will have an opportunity to know how much this repeal will cost. Again, Mr. Leader, I hope you are going to be able to tell me, no, Mr. Whip, we are going to have hearings, we understand how important this issue is, how much interest there is in this country, and we are going to give time for serious consideration, and we are going to have witnesses come before those hearings; and then after the witnesses, we are going to have a markup after substantial debate and consideration is allowed on both sides of the aisle. I now yield to the majority leader with the hopes that he will be able to give me some degree of confidence that Paul Ryan, our Speaker, was correct, that we are going to follow regular order and make a transparent consideration of this piece of legislation. I yield to my friend.

Mr. HOYER. I have some more.

Mr. HOYER. Is that what the gentleman is telling me? I yield to my friend.

Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for his comment. It is, therefore, extraordinarily sad that we have spent 6 years with only one option that the majority would pursue: repeal. Not fix, not make it work better, not ensure that people can afford their care, not make sure that insurance companies had the competence to stay in the market because the market was destabilized for all of its lifetime to date by the Republicans saying all we are going to do is repeal. The gentleman talks about the cost. The gentleman cannot tell me some 4 days before he suggests passing a piece of legislation that will affect 18 percent of our gross domestic product what it will cost. Why? Because he has no score from the CBO. He can tell me all he wants about 6 years of waiting and listening. He has no score on this bill. My judgment is he will have no score when he marks it up. By the way, he will give no access, contrary to Speaker Ryan saying that we are going to go regular order. I reject, with all due respect, Mr. Majority Leader, the fact that we had a hearing a year ago or 2 years ago or 3 years ago, that the opinion that was given at those times by various witnesses who differed on their conclusions, that we can apply that to the bill that you have introduced now. I don't know what the bill you have introduced is. I don't know whether you have introduced it or somebody else has introduced it. I don't even know whether it exists. I told the gentleman what I am told. He has not disabused me of any of the assertions I made. He has not disabused me that it is not available publicly. He has not disabused me of the fact that we can't see it. He has not disabused me of Dr. Burgess saying it ought to be seen by everybody and considered, it should not be in a secret room someplace that people have to go to, like it is a secret document. We have to go down to the Capitol Visitor Center in the secure facilities of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence to see secret documents. Surely that is not the standard that we are giving to a bill that will have such, in my view, catastrophic effect on individuals, on jobs, and on businesses. Mr. Speaker, I want to tell the majority leader that I do not accept the proposition that a hearing over 6 years about repeal only--and I am not sure how many hearings there were. Maybe the majority leader knows. But I know for a fact that proponents of the bill were very difficult to get on the list of witnesses that we wanted to testify at some of those hearings. The American people, the Tea Party, all those people for and against who came to these town meetings should really lament. And, frankly, I think that the Speaker's representation is not being followed. The assertion that it was done last year, the year before, we have a lot of new Members in this Congress who weren't here. Frankly, when we have bills introduced in Congress, we usually have hearings on them. That is the regular order. Now, we haven't been following regular order on all these congressional review acts, Mr. Leader, so maybe the precedent nowadays is forget about hearings because most of the bills that we have considered during this Congress have not had hearings. The ramifications of the repeal of these rules no one knows. There were no hearings on those. Frankly, we didn't have hearings on those year after year after year in the past. So, Mr. Leader, it appears that the representation you are making is we know all about this, we don't need hearings, we have been talking about this stuff forever, we are just going to act. The courage, I would suggest to my friend, the courage would be to expose these to full and fair and open debate. That would be the courage. Now, Mr. Leader, unless you want to respond to that, I will move on to a different subject.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Leader, you can be assured that history will show that. Can I see the bill today?

Mr. HOYER. In other words, they will mark it up before anybody in the public, including a Member of the House of Representatives----

Mr. HOYER. Before then, we cannot see it.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Leader, reclaiming my time, that is not regular order. I have been here a long time. You have been here a long time. That is not regular order. Regular order is you introduce a bill, you go up to this desk, and you put a bill in. We don't follow that very much, but that is regular order. It is then printed. It is referred to a committee. The public can see it as soon as it is printed. It goes to the committee. They establish a hearing. The witnesses then come before the committee and testify as to its positive and negative aspects. The committee then schedules a markup. It may even be the same day after the hearing, I get that. And then they mark it up. But the bill has been given to the public and to Members, invariably under regular order, substantially before that happens. You are telling me, as I understand it, Mr. Leader, I cannot see the bill today, 5 days before it is scheduled to be marked up. Is that accurate? I yield to my friend.

Mr. HOYER. Is the leader telling me that he does not know personally whether a markup is scheduled on the Affordable Care Act repeal next week? I yield to my friend.

Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman, but that was not my question, whether the chairman of the committee knows. Maybe the gentleman does not know, in which case he can say no. My question is: Does the gentleman know whether a markup is scheduled for next week in the Ways and Means Committee on the repeal of the Affordable Care Act? I yield to my friend.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I don't know whether that is a ``yes'' or a ``no'' or ``I don't intend to tell you,'' but it certainly does not tell me whether the majority leader knows that. I would suggest to the chairman of the committee, though, Mr. Speaker, that the majority leader ought to be informed of what the committee is doing on such an important issue. I am just informed that while the majority leader may not know, The Hill newspaper knows and says: ObamaCare reconciliation markup on track for next week. They, perhaps, heard the same rumor I have heard, Mr. Leader.