George Holding

Mr. HOLDING

Mr. HOLDING. Mr. Speaker, I rise to share a story from a constituent of mine in Cary, North Carolina, about the real impact that ObamaCare has had on him and his family. He is an independent businessman, diagnosed with leukemia, and he wrote that his income has fluctuated in recent years because the disease limits his work capacity. Medical costs have skyrocketed for his chemotherapy and other treatment but have been well covered by his current provider. Mr. Speaker, after about 10 years of care under the same health care plan, he received a notice that his current policy covering his family of four is being terminated. The ObamaCare-compliant approved replacement plan will increase their premium by about 77 percent, or $9,000 per year. This is a serious financial challenge for them, and they may have to sell their home. Mr. Speaker, after everything this man has already been through, he now has to deal with the frustration and uncertainty of this administration's back-and-forth policy. This is not what he and the American people were promised by the President, and it is simply unacceptable.

Mr. HOLDING

Mr. HOLDING. Madam Speaker, President Rouhani of Iran is doing exactly what he was put in power to do: get the Obama administration to weaken international economic sanctions. Our sanctions, Madam Speaker, are working. Unfortunately, Secretary Kerry and this administration have been chasing an agreement with Iran that relaxes sanctions and allows Iran to continue enriching material and developing their heavy-water reactor. This is an outcome that the regime in Tehran desires, and they won't have to make any concessions to get it. Madam Speaker, the tentative deal does nothing to address Iran's sponsorship of terrorist organizations, like Hezbollah, nor does it deal with their overt persecution of religious minorities in Iran or their vast human rights abuses. As Prime Minister Netanyahu stated, ``This is a very, very bad deal.'' The administration needs to stop negotiating bad deals and cease their efforts to block a new round of sanctions.

Mr. HOLDING

Mr. HOLDING. Madam Speaker, President Obama promised the American people that if you liked your health care plan, you could keep your health care plan. Period. No exceptions. Now, as the ObamaCare exchanges have opened and enrollment has begun, there are hundreds of thousands of people in North Carolina who are finding that the President's promise doesn't hold true. According to the North Carolina Department of Insurance, over 183,000 policies have already been terminated, impacting over 473,000 people and their families across the State. When ObamaCare supporters talk about the new health care law, they focus on the number of people who previously did not have health care and will now be covered. What you don't hear them talk about is the people who already had health care and are losing it now. They don't talk about the canceled policies and the alternative plans offered that are vastly more expensive and far from comparable. This is extremely misleading, Madam Speaker, and this administration has demonstrated a lack of transparency when it comes to the real impacts of ObamaCare. Madam Speaker, I have heard from hundreds of constituents whose health care plans are going up in cost or being canceled altogether. A man in his sixties from Zebulon, North Carolina, wrote to my office that his wife's current plan, which costs $292 a month, will be discontinued because it does not comply with ObamaCare standards. She will be moved to a comparable plan that doubles her monthly payment. On top of the increased cost, the new plan is not tailored to their needs. The couple is in their sixties, retired, and their children are adults; yet their new plan includes newborn care, plus dental and vision for dependent children. A constituent from Cary, North Carolina, wrote in with similar concerns. He and his wife currently pay about $715 a month for their health care plan and were informed that it was being canceled. Their new plan will cost them double annually and will no longer include vision care, but they are now both covered for maternity care. He wrote that his present policy is better and more suited for two people in their sixties, and ``it just doesn't seem quite fair that two people who have always been responsible and done without things in order to afford health care insurance and save enough to retire should now be faced with this.'' Madam Speaker, I agree. Men and women of all ages across my home State and the country are feeling the negative impacts of ObamaCare. I received a letter from a mother in Wake Forest, North Carolina, who got a notice that her monthly premium for a family of four is going from $624 a month to $1,207 a month. This is as much as their mortgage payment. Now her family is forced to pay the steep increase or choose a plan that includes a smaller premium, but with fewer benefits and much higher deductibles. So much for keeping the health care plan she liked. Another constituent from Cary wrote that a difference in cost between his current BlueCross BlueShield plan and the lowest option under ObamaCare is about $700 a month, tripling his current rate. How is this comparable to the plan he already has and now cannot keep? Madam Speaker, these are real people who have real problems with ObamaCare. President Obama needs to listen to North Carolinians and American families across the country. Stories like this indicate that what President Obama said simply wasn't true. People are being forced into plans that include coverage they don't need or want, and they are not being able to keep the doctors and plans they had for years. ObamaCare gives little choice and puts many in an impossible financial situation. Madam Speaker, this is simply not right. The American people want to be able to keep their doctors and health care plans that they were promised, and they were promised this by the President. That promise should be upheld.

Mr. HOLDING

Mr. HOLDING. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2871) to amend title 28, United States Code, to modify the composition of the southern judicial district of Mississippi to improve judicial efficiency, and for other purposes.

Mr. HOLDING. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 2871.

Mr. HOLDING. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. H.R. 2871 is a simple and straightforward bill that responds to a single question: How should the Federal judicial districts in Mississippi be organized to best serve the needs of litigants, jurors, the bar, and the public once the Meridian, Mississippi, courthouse is permanently closed? The answer was developed by an ad hoc committee of judges that was formed late last year; and to their credit, they fashioned a solution that has been reviewed and endorsed by everyone from the affected local bar associations and the Inns of Court to the Judicial Conference of the United States. Specifically, the committee recommended, one, abolishing the Southern District's current Eastern Division; two, modifying the statutory designations of places to hold court; three, realigning the remaining four divisions and places of holding court; and, four, renaming the realigned divisions. The judiciary and offices within the Department of Justice have reported that they will achieve significant cost savings when this proposal is fully implemented. Quite simply, Mr. Speaker, the sooner we enact this bill, the sooner these savings can be realized. But beyond the goal of containing unnecessary costs, this legislation is a priority since the affected courts are engaged in the time- consuming and expensive process of replenishing their jury wheel. That process requires the courts to identify the names of possible jurors for criminal trials and grand jury service for the next 4 years and to provide proportional representation under the new divisions. And that process is on hold until Congress passes and the President signs this bill. Acting through the Administrative Office of the Courts, the judiciary approached the gentleman from North Carolina, the chairman of the Courts, Intellectual Property and the Internet Subcommittee, Representative Howard Coble. Chairman Coble immediately recognized the importance of moving this legislation expeditiously and personally committed his efforts to ensure its passage. On behalf of the full committee chairman, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte), I also want to recognize the efforts of the ranking member, Mr. Watt, and the other cosponsors of this bill, which include Representatives Harper, Thompson, and Palazzo from Mississippi, for their bipartisan support and advocacy. The Committee on the Judiciary reported this bill unanimously in September. It is supported not only by those that I have mentioned, but also by Senators Cochran and Wicker from Mississippi, who are committed to doing everything possible to advance the bill through the other body without delay. In summary, this is a good bill and it is urgently needed to ensure the Federal courts in Mississippi are authorized and organized to function in the most economically efficient and least disruptive manner as possible. I urge my colleagues to support its passage. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HOLDING. Mr. Speaker, it is with pleasure that I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Coble), the leader of the North Carolina delegation and the chairman of the Subcommittee on Courts.

Mr. HOLDING. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank very much Chairman Coble for his words. I also want to thank him for his friendship and his mentorship and the leadership that he has shown in this body on the Judiciary Committee, and particularly on the subcommittee for intellectual property and the courts. I urge my colleagues to join with us in support of this bipartisan, commonsense legislation to efficiently reorganize the courts in Mississippi, and I urge a ``yes'' vote on this. I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. HOLDING

Mr. HOLDING. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2922) to extend the authority of the Supreme Court Police to protect court officials away from the Supreme Court grounds.

Mr. HOLDING. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials on H.R. 2922, currently under consideration.

Mr. HOLDING. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. H.R. 2922 is a simple and straightforward measure that accomplishes one purpose. It extends for a period of 6 years the longstanding authority of the Supreme Court Police to provide appropriate security and protective services to Justices, Court employees, and official guests of the Court. Mr. Speaker, article III of the Constitution provides, in part, ``the judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one Supreme Court.'' It is essential to the functioning of the Supreme Court that Justices, Court employees, and their official visitors be able to perform their critical duties with the knowledge that they are provided adequate and appropriate protective services. For more than three decades, Mr. Speaker, Congress has specifically authorized the Supreme Court Police to provide limited security beyond the Court building for these specific classes of persons. This authority, which is due to expire at the end of this year, has been extended by Congress seven times since 1986. H.R. 2922 is a straightforward extension of this authority for an additional 6 years. Mr. Speaker, I served in the Federal law enforcement community as a United States attorney in the Eastern District of North Carolina, and I understand that we can never take security for granted. That is why I decided to personally introduce this bill earlier this year. I want to thank the chairman of the committee, the Honorable Bob Goodlatte, for recognizing the significance of this bill and moving it forward. I also want to thank the outstanding support of the ranking member of the full committee, Mr. Conyers, and chairman and vice chairman and ranking member of the Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet Subcommittee, Representatives Coble, Marino, and Watt, respectively, for their bipartisan leadership and cooperation in helping to advance this measure. In closing, Mr. Speaker, this is a good and noncontroversial bill that deserves the House's support. It is also one that we have good reason to expect will be taken up in the other body in the very near future. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time

Mr. HOLDING. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. This is a bipartisan measure that extends long-existing previous policy, and it is certainly critically needed and should be done as soon as possible so as not to run up against the deadline at the end of the year.

Mr. HOLDING. I yield to the gentleman from North Carolina.

Mr. HOLDING. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Coble), the leader of the North Carolina delegation,

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

Mr. HOLDING

Mr. HOLDING. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 196) supporting the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution, the right to counsel, as amended.

Mr. HOLDING. Mr. Speaker, I asks unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials on H. Res. 196, currently under consideration.

Mr. HOLDING. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. The Sixth Amendment of the United States Constitution states that ``in all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right . . . to have the assistance of counsel for his defence.'' H. Res. 196 supports the Sixth Amendment, the right to counsel, and strategies to ensure that indigent defendants in all felony cases are adequately represented by counsel. Fifty years ago, Mr. Speaker, the Supreme Court, in Gideon v. Wainwright, held that providing counsel to indigent defendants is one of the essential requirements of the Sixth Amendment. Writing for the majority, Justice Black stated: From the very beginning, our State and national constitutions and laws have laid great emphasis on procedural and substantive safeguards designed to assure fair trials before impartial tribunals in which every defendant stands equal before the law. Since the Gideon decision, the Supreme Court has held that absent a knowing and intelligent waiver, no person may be imprisoned for any offense, whether classified as petty, misdemeanor, or felony, unless that person was represented by counsel at his or her trial. This resolution reaffirms Congress' continued commitment to pursuing fairness in our criminal justice system and calls on States to help ensure that defendants are adequately represented by counsel. I urge Members to support it, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HOLDING. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this measure and vote ``yes.'' I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HOLDING. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. HOLDING

Mr. HOLDING. Mr. Speaker, just a week after the debt ceiling was suspended, the Federal Government added $375 billion in new debt. Without a limit on spending until mid-February, the Federal Government continues to borrow more than it takes in and spend at an outrageous rate. The fact is, Mr. Speaker, at a spending rate of $375 billion a week, U.S. debt would be over $22 trillion by the next debt ceiling deadline. This is unacceptable and unsustainable. Mr. Speaker, the reason we have found ourselves in a fiscal rut is because of outrageous, frivolous government spending. We have to come to the table and do more to cut spending in the next debt deal. This includes comprehensive tax reform to make our Tax Code less burdensome and changes to our entitlement programs to ensure that they are working as they should for future generations. American families know that they cannot spend limitlessly and never pay their bills. Our Federal Government should not be any different, and it is time to break our bad spending habits.

Mr. HOLDING

Mr. HOLDING. Mr. Speaker, in just a few short months, we will again find ourselves debating how to not shut down the Federal Government. Our Nation's fiscal woes are not temporary. In fact, they have plagued us for many years, and we have got to stop trying to solve these problems with temporary solutions. The fact is, Mr. Speaker, we are now $17 trillion in debt, and our government continues to spend and spend and spend. Last Thursday, our Nation's debt jumped $328 billion in just 1 day. This surpassed the previous high set 2 years ago by over $100 billion. It is time Congress breaks this pattern. We do not want to be a Nation drowning in debt but, rather, one of economic leadership throughout the world, pro- growth policies. Mr. Speaker, we simply cannot borrow 40 cents of every dollar we spend. It is simply not the way to run a government, a business, or a family budget. Yet the Federal Government continues to borrow without addressing what got us here in the first place, which is out-of-control spending. Mr. Speaker, the deal agreed to last week didn't do a single thing to cut spending or tackle the real drivers of our debt; and if we do not change this, we will never get ourselves out of the fiscal rut but, instead, find ourselves repeating history over and over and over again, governing and spending by continuing resolutions. Rather than passing temporary spending bills and short-term extensions to the debt ceiling, we should be working to pass all 12 appropriation bills and a real budget. This doesn't need to be a deal at the eleventh hour. If we go through a regular budgetary process, we will most certainly find areas to eliminate wasteful spending, shore up entitlement spending, and achieve comprehensive tax reform. Mr. Speaker, the Federal Government is already spending too much, and ObamaCare will only make things worse. It is estimated that ObamaCare will increase taxes over $1 trillion and add $6 trillion to the deficit. Putting aside the countless policy issues associated with ObamaCare, the law, from a purely numerical economic standpoint, is a prime example of out-of-control spending. Overall, ObamaCare is expected to increase health care spending by $621 billion over the next 10 years. We cannot afford this. Our children cannot afford this, and the economy will crumble underneath it. Mr. Speaker, the American people are frustrated with seeing their elected officials in Washington sit on either side of the wall and refuse to make real spending cuts. It is time to sit down and have a conversation about how we get our fiscal house in order and get our spending addiction under control. We cannot continue to jeopardize our economy and our Nation's future by spending more than we take in.

Mr. HOLDING

Mr. HOLDING. Mr. Speaker, I rise to join Taiwan in celebrating its National Day. The United States and Taiwan enjoy a long, enduring relationship. Our partnership, codified in the Taiwan Relations Act, has been of great benefit to both our nations. Earlier this year, I was pleased to support legislation which, was signed into law, that encourages Taiwan's participation in the International Civil Aviation Organization. To further our relationship, I support more bilateral exchanges between our two nations and would encourage my colleagues to familiarize themselves with the cultural and economic benefits that this relationship has produced. Once again Mr. Speaker I rise to congratulate Taiwan on its National Day and I am confident that the close relationship between United States and Taiwan will continue for many years to come.

Mr. HOLDING

Mr. HOLDING. Madam Speaker, online enrollment for ObamaCare has been open for just 10 days, and healthcare.gov has already proved to be an unmitigated disaster. Madam Speaker, the launch of ObamaCare's Web site was originally slated to cost the American taxpayers $93 million. It is now reported to have cost over $634 million and, with so many problems and failures, will undoubtedly cost even more. Already it has been taken offline to try to fix the glitches. What is worse is that the administration hasn't been able to give a clear picture of what this $634 million has gotten us. The number of people who have actually been able to enroll is completely unclear. Madam Speaker, the Web site has been a failure thus far and a complete waste of taxpayer dollars. President Obama insisted on a mandate but didn't figure out the details of how it would actually work.