Jay Inslee

Mr. INSLEE

Mr. INSLEE. The purpose of this resolution is to honor the aviators who have done such courageous duty for this country. And they have. And I think one of the things they have done because of their sacrifices is that they have always given America a chance to become a more perfect union. And I think the language in our founding documents of working towards a more perfect union suggests that we're a country that's always looking for an opportunity to get just a little bit better. And we now have a bill we will be voting on tomorrow that does give America a chance, not to solve all our problems, but to get a little bit better when it comes to health care. And I just want to, in the context of an aviator, suggest what that may mean. Let's take an aviator that goes to France, serves in a B-17 like so many courageous aviators did, is shot down, rescued, prisoner- of-war, returns, starts a little business, raises a family back home, survives World War II, raises let's say his daughter, she grows up to maturity, maybe has a kid. He is a proud grandfather like many of these aviators are. What could happen to his daughter right now in the current situation of the law? What could happen is she could have insurance, she could have a good job, she could be taking care of her family, and then she can develop cancer. And do you know what this side of the aisle wants to allow to continue to be the law of the United States of America? They want to let the aviator's daughter to be able to be canceled in her insurance policy because she develops cancer. Let's assume the grandchild of the aviator develops diabetes and gets to maturity and wants to go out and buy an insurance policy. Guess what this side of the aisle wants to allow to be continued practiced in America? They, who are going to be voting en masse, en masse, against health care reform, against this step forward tomorrow, they will be voting tomorrow to allow the aviator's grandchild to be denied insurance because she developed diabetes. Now I question whether American aviators who fight wars proudly think it's really up to American standards to allow the children and grandchildren of aviators to be denied coverage because they developed illness. We don't think that is good enough for America. We think we deserve better. And what we will be doing tomorrow is voting for a provision that will give the families of aviators the right, in fact, to be treated fairly in America. Now I know many people, they have argued this is somehow a government takeover of health care. I've thought about that, and I can understand people don't want a government takeover of health care. But it is fundamental. What this does is it changes the relationship between Americans and the insurance industry. And that's a relationship, and the rules of that relationship do need to change because we need to give Americans more choice. We need to give them more freedom. We need to give them more protection against some of the practices of the insurance companies. And that's what we will be voting to do tomorrow. So I say let's honor some aviators. Let's honor their families by giving their families the right to have health care even though they have asthma, even though they have diabetes, even though they have Parkinson's. Whether they are Republicans or Democrats, or red and blue States, all Americans deserve to be able to have insurance in this country. That's what we're going to do tomorrow.

Mr. INSLEE

Mr. INSLEE. This is a great bill because it will help American kids to understand what is going on in the oceans, which is they are becoming too acidic to support life as we know it. They are 30 percent more acidic because of carbon pollution. We have got to do something about that. It is nice to let our kids know what is going on. But I want to respond to this criticism of the health care reform bill, because this Sunday people are going to stand up on this floor and be counted, and they are either going to be with the insurance industry in their ability to stop Americans from getting health insurance because they have diabetes or they will be with us who are going to stop insurance companies from denying coverage to Americans with diabetes and Parkinson's and heart problems. Now, this criticism of the procedure that is going to be used reminds me of an old show I saw, ``To Tell the Truth.'' And they showed a guy one time, he was a park ranger in Yosemite National Park. He got hit by lightning not once, not twice, but five times, and they asked him what advice he would give to people in a lightning storm. He thought about it for a minute and he said, My advice would be don't stand next to me. Well, during this debate, don't stand next to the Republicans who are giving you this balderdash poppycock that there is something wrong with this procedure we are going to use, and I will tell you why. The procedure we are going to use, we are going to vote. Everybody's votes are going to be right up there. It comports with the U.S. Constitution. I will tell you how I know. It is the same procedure the Republicans have used scores of times for the last two decades. Of the times this procedure has been used in the last two decades, 72 percent of the time it was initiated by the Republican Party. Now, if you tell me there is something wrong with that, there might be a little hypocrisy involved. And when there is hypocrisy involved, maybe you could get struck by lightning. So let me suggest that during this debate, for the Republicans who are going to say there is something wrong with the constitutional process we have of voting, don't stand next to a Republican. They might get struck by lightning.

Mr. INSLEE

Mr. INSLEE. Mr. Speaker, as we head to our health care reform decision, I think a story of a fellow I met the other day, a very unique American, bears repeating. His name is Gary Hall. He was in my office yesterday. Gary Hall won five gold medals, three silver medals, and two bronze medals in swimming, over three separate Olympics, really an incredible achievement. He got his medical insurance through the Olympic Committee for 12 years, but after that he wasn't eligible. And guess what happened? No one would write him insurance because he has diabetes. The insurance companies said, we don't care if you've won gold medals, silver medals, and bronze medals, we won't give you insurance. Now, that has got to change. We have to pass a health reform bill. Whether you've won a gold medal in swimming or you're just an average Joe or Jane, you ought to be able to buy insurance, even if you've got diabetes. We are going to have a bill on the floor shortly that we are going to vote on. The vote's going to be transparent. It's going to be recorded. Everybody knows what it's going to be. It's going to be constitutional. It's going to be just the way we've voted for years. We're going to make sure people get health insurance in this country.

Mr. INSLEE

Mr. INSLEE. I had a remarkable American in my office this morning, Gary Hall, who won five golds, three silvers, and two bronzes in three Olympic Games in freestyle swimming, a remarkable person. And he told me a story about having insurance for 12 years while he was in the Olympics, but then after he lost the Olympics, he couldn't get insurance. Do you know why? He has diabetes. Here is a guy who won gold, silver, and bronze medals and couldn't get insurance in America because he had diabetes. And the reason he couldn't get insurance in America is that we haven't passed our health care reform bill yet. In the next few days, we are going to put up at least 216 votes, I hope, green lights on that board, to pass health care reform so that Gary Hall can get insurance; and even if you haven't won a gold medal, you can get insurance if you have diabetes. And these people who are smoking something, I don't know what, who think we aren't going to take a vote on this, I am going to take a picture of this board to show you the votes, because the green lights are going to be to make sure that people with diabetes can get insurance, and the red lights will be you can't get insurance even if you have won a gold medal. That is not right. It is going to change in this country.

Mr. INSLEE

Mr. INSLEE. Madam Speaker, on rollcall No. 95 I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. INSLEE

Mr. INSLEE. Mr. Speaker, I visited a couple of fascinating companies. Applied Materials in Santa Clara, California, makes the world's largest photovoltaic cell because they figured out a way to do it and reduce manufacturing costs. I then drove up the road to Bloom Energy, which has developed a fuel cell that actually can convert natural gas to electricity right on site at your home or your office. These two companies are typical of the companies that can lead to the creation of millions of new clean-energy jobs for a new clean-energy economy in the United States, but they are waiting on the other Chamber to pass a bill that will put a limit on carbon pollution. Once we put a limit on carbon pollution, companies like Applied Materials and Bloom Energy will in fact bloom and blossom because they will be on a level playing field. Let's get a cap on carbon pollution. Let's build a new clean energy economy for this country.

Mr. INSLEE

Mr. INSLEE. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor Polly Dyer for her more than fifty years of leadership and hard work improving and protecting the environment of our nation. Polly, along with her husband John, played a leading role in the passage of the 1964 Wilderness Act, which preserved millions of acres of land throughout the nation--the equivalent of almost 10 percent of Washington's land mass. She has made a special contribution to the protection and enhancement of the Olympic National Park and to the underwater domains of the Pacific Coast National Marine Sanctuary. Her efforts directly contributed to the development and preservation of the North Cascades National Park. She had a major role in the creation of the North Cascades Conservation Council, the Puget Sound Alliance, and was a key player in the formation of the Puget Sound Water Quality Authority. My family and I have hiked the trails and slept under the stars on land she fought hard to save for future generations. We know and honor the great heritage she is preserving for our nation. Polly Dyer has mentored, inspired and nurtured several generations of wilderness leaders in Washington State. On and off the trail, in and out of the halls of Congress, Polly Dyer is the exemplar of a wilderness leader. Thank you, Polly Dyer, for everything that you have done.

Mr. INSLEE

Mr. INSLEE. Mr. Speaker, this morning America is engaged in a great race, and that is a race with China to see who will be preeminent in the creation of millions of new jobs in the new clean energy economy. The President is right: the Nation that leads the clean energy economy will lead the world economy, and he is right that we do not intend to finish second place in this race. Now at this moment, there is something pending in the U.S. Senate to determine whether we will win this race. There is something that is absolutely fundamental to drive millions of dollars of investment to these new technologies in solar and wind and geothermal so that we will finish first in this race, and that is to put a cap on carbon pollution. Because when we put a cap on carbon pollution, we will drive investment into the jobs of tomorrow. We must remain resolute. We call on the President to remain resolute. We have to deliver a cap on carbon so we can finish number one in the jobs race.

Mr. INSLEE

Mr. INSLEE. Madam Speaker, there have been times in history where great technological challenges have been overcome by the combined efforts from both government policy and scientific innovation. We are sitting at one of those critical junctions today. Our country is taking active steps to curb our energy consumption by implementing energy efficiency policies and is also highly engaged in scientific innovation to make renewable technologies, such as solar, a sustainable part of our total energy portfolio. I am here today to discuss several promising technological advancements in solar systems that might one day help reduce our country's dependence on foreign energy sources. As we know, solar technologies come in several flavors. Some systems such as solar photovoltaic convert the sun's energy directly into useable electricity. Other technologies such as solar-thermal systems use the sun's energy to boil water that then turns a steam turbine which ultimately generates electricity. Development of solar photovoltaic systems has relied on manufacturing processes developed in the microelectronics industry, which has relied heavily on silicon as the main material component. These manufacturing methods can be slow and they yield relatively expensive solar cells. Through technological advancements in material science, new materials such as copper-indium-selenide (CIS) or copper-indium-gallium-selenide (CIGS) have resulted in low-cost solar cells. Solar cells made with these materials can even be printed much like you would print a document with your ink-jet printer at home. While CIS/CIGS photovoltaic advancements are driving manufacturing costs down, further advancements in silicon solar cells are also progressing. Advancements have been possible through new techniques used in nanotechnology labs across the country. The new generation of solar cells, instead of being constructed of flat layers of material on a silicon wafer, may end up looking more like microscopic cities. These ``3D'' solar cells are showing promise as they may be able to better absorb the sun's energy and convert it to usable electricity. Great things are happening in the solar photovoltaic world, but important advancements in the solar thermal world are also taking place. Recently concerns about the amount of water used in generation of electricity with solar-thermal power plants were raised; these concerns can be misleading as similar amounts of cool water are needed for coal or natural gas power plants. Regardless the solar-thermal industry has responded with an innovative dry-cooling process which could reduce the water consumed to almost nothing. There are some that want a silver bullet to lay to rest our country's issues with foreign energy sources. While no such bullet exists, we can make real progress by encouraging development in all these promising technologies in parallel. Doing so can help States, like Washington State, achieve goals outlined in their renewable portfolio standards. On a larger scale we can move our entire country towards a clean energy source. I hope that my colleagues here in Congress will help me in moving relevant bills swiftly through our legislative process.

Mr. INSLEE

Mr. INSLEE. Mr. Speaker, we know that job creation is Congress's job one, and we passed some time ago a great job creation engine for a clean energy economy in the United States. We passed that months ago in the U.S. House, and we know we have a tremendous opportunity for job creation. Building electric cars: I drove a Ford Focus all-electric car a couple of months ago. Building solar thermal plants: We now have contracts developing out in the Southwest. Building new energy- efficient windows: We heard from an entrepreneur the other day about the tremendous advances in energy efficiency. Yet, to realize this economic vision, the U.S. Senate needs to get off the dime and pass a clean energy bill, and those who think that we should do nothing because Copenhagen didn't reach an agreement, I'll tell you what: the Chinese are not waiting. They're building solar plants. They're building electrical lithium-ion batteries. They're building new energy-efficient windows. The U.S. Senate needs to join us and create a job-creating engine with clean energy and pass the energy bill.

Mr. INSLEE

Mr. INSLEE. Madam Speaker, I want to recognize the Boeing Co. on their first flight of the 787 Dreamliner. This successful flight marks an important milestone in the development of the 787 Dreamliner, and represents the collective efforts and hard work of everyone at the Boeing Company, particularly the dedicated Boeing employees who live in my district. The 787 Dreamliner is airplane that is not only much more efficient than any other airplane on the market, but also represents a new generation of technologically advanced commercial airplanes that will change the future of commercial aviation.

Mr. INSLEE

Mr. INSLEE. Madam Speaker, we cannot allow a great injustice to the American worker, to the American warfighter and to the American taxpayer, which would happen if a contract for the Air Force tanker goes to the Airbus contractor without taking into consideration these massive illegal subsidies that the Airbus competitor has received. We have decided and we have determined, the U.S. Government, that Airbus has received multibillion dollars of illegal subsidies, which have allowed them to develop a tanker with which they now have to bid against an American contractor, the Boeing Company. We are calling upon the administration to do the right thing, which is in the contracting process, and figure into the respective bids the amount of the illegal subsidies that the Airbus company has received. And they can do that by having the countervailing duty section of the U.S. Department of Trade Representative determine the amount of that illegal subsidy. When that illegal subsidy is added to the Airbus bid, the right thing will happen, and we will have American jobs.

Mr. INSLEE

Mr. INSLEE. Mr. Speaker, I hear that the former Vice President has made an assertion about the Governor who quit in Alaska, Sarah Palin. He asserted that hers is the attitude of a denier, a denier of the clear need to address global warming. But that attitude is worse than being a denier. It is the attitude of a defeatist, because the defeatists believe that we Americans can't build electric cars. The defeatists believe we can't, in America, build solar thermal plants. The defeatists believe we can't build offshore wind turbine plants. The defeatists believe that we can't build thousands of jobs here in America, rather than allow those jobs in clean energy to go to China. When those people like Sarah Palin, who have the attitude of defeatists, join us in a sense of optimism that we can change our economy to a green collar economy, we will build a clean energy economy that is the envy of the world. And we urge them to join us.

Mr. INSLEE

Mr. INSLEE. Mr. Speaker, the President is right to go to Copenhagen and lead the world against global warming. He is right to defeat the birthers who have tried to stop him from being President and the deniers who refuse to accept the fact of global warming. Both the birthers and the deniers refuse to accept clear, pure facts. I just read that a former Governor of Alaska was arguing today in a newspaper that there is no such thing as global warming associated with human activity. She needs to read the National Academy of Sciences report which concludes it is a fact. She needs to read the report of NASA--the people who put the men on the Moon--that concludes this is a fact. She needs to read the NOAA reports about acidification of the ocean which shows it is a fact. The birthers and the deniers are wrong. We should restore American leadership and make sure the jobs of the future clean energy economy are here, not just in China. The President is right; the deniers are wrong yet again.

Mr. INSLEE

Mr. INSLEE. Madam Speaker, today in Tacoma, Washington, the State of Washington will honor and memorialize the service and lives of four Lakewood City police officers who were slain while on duty on November 30 this year. Sergeant Mark Renninger, Officer Ronald Owens, Officer Tina Griswold, and Officer Gregory Richards were killed while in the line of duty. And today, in the Tacoma Dome, thousands of Washingtonians will embrace them in their arms and in their hearts and to show respect for their loss. But I just want to note that it is the Nation that appropriately honors and memorializes these four officers, and the reason is that they are symbols of the service of police and sheriff's officers all over this country who are out on dark roads, who are working in dark cities, who are doing the hard detective work it takes to keep us safe. And I hope we will thank the next officer we see for their service. And I just want to tell these families how I feel. I lost my cousin, a sheriff's deputy, Mark Brown, in 1999 while in the line of duty. My prayers and heart goes out to these families, and I hope all my colleagues will join me in that regard.

Mr. INSLEE

Mr. INSLEE. Madam Speaker, I rise today to express my support for the Affordable Health Care for America Act. Today marks an historic day for the health of all Americans. Today, this Congress joins with the American people to say that health care is not only a policy issue, but an issue of morality; and no longer will the conscience of this country allow Americans to go without access to affordable, comprehensive health care coverage. I want to thank Speaker Pelosi and the House leadership for their steadfast determination; and Chairmen Rangel, Miller, and particularly Chairman Waxman of the Energy and Commerce committee on which I am proud to sit, for their thoughtful leadership on this issue. Access to affordable health care has the power to break the shackles imposed on Americans today who are fearful of leaving their job, starting a new business, or going to the doctor due to their lack of coverage. In my district alone, this bill has the power to provide coverage for 30,000 uninsured residents; improve employer-coverage for 524,000 residents; provide credits to help pay for coverage for up to 120,000 households; improve Medicare for 84,000 beneficiaries, including closing the prescription drug donut hole for 7,400 seniors; allow 20,000 small businesses to obtain affordable health care coverage and provide tax credits to help reduce health insurance costs for up to 18,600 small businesses. Additionally, this legislation will protect up to 1,100 families from bankruptcy due to unaffordable health care costs; and reduce the cost of uncompensated care for hospitals and health care providers by $28 million. As a member of the Energy and Commerce committee I was able to fight to include several provisions that will improve access to affordable health care in Washington state, the most important of which is President Obama's public health insurance option. Like our President, I believe that it is important to protect the interest of the consumer by providing choices so that people may decide which health insurance solution works best for them and their family. That is one reason I am a strong advocate of a public health insurance option. The President's public health insurance option will be offered in a health insurance exchange, created in this bill, alongside coverage sold by private insurers; thereby using natural market competition to control the rising cost of health coverage while protecting consumer choice. The implementation of this exchange will make insurance affordable for an additional 36 million Americans, raising the share of legal, nonelderly residents with health insurance coverage from 83 percent to 96 percent. The public insurance option will bring competition to the marketplace and consumer interests will be protected by addressing affordability and access issues that plague our current system. Washington state is a leader in high-quality, efficient health care. Our doctors and hospitals produce some of the country's best health care outcomes. We have a culture of medicine that places emphasis on patient safety, outcomes, and care. And yet for decades we have been penalized for our efficiency by receiving lower reimbursement rates per service under the Medicare fee-for-service reimbursement model. On average our providers are reimbursed fifteen to fifty percent less per service than their counterparts in other parts of the country. The reason for this discrepancy is that our statewide efficiency gives the appearance that it merely costs less to deliver care in the state because our overall patient costs are lower. Opponents have argued that practice expenses vary by geography. But, on November 5, 2009, the American Medical Association (AMA) released the results of its 2007-2008 study that included physician practice expense information from over seventy medical specialty societies and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Physician Practice Information (PPI) survey. The results of the study showed that expenses did not differ significantly by either metro location or census region and reconfirmed what providers in Washington state have know for decades--that the Medicare physician payment formula is flawed. To this end, I was honored to be one of eight Members chosen by Speaker Pelosi to negotiate a resolution to this geographic disparity issue that has plagued our country for decades. The result, after four months of negotiations, is an agreement that will move the nation to a system that rewards high quality, cost-effective care; reimbursing for the value rather than the volume of services. It will fix existing Medicare geographic payment inequities and will cover both physician and hospital payments. This will provide an historic transformation of the Medicare payment system to ensure better care for patients and reduce health care costs over the long term. The first part of the agreement addresses the geographic variation in the rates doctors are paid per service. The bill instructs the Institute of Medicine (IOM) to conduct a study to evaluate and make recommendations to improve the geographic adjustment factors in the Medicare reimbursement formulas which will be completed one year after enactment. The Secretary of HHS will then implement a new Medicare payment rate that takes into account the IOM recommendations. An initial investment of $4 billion per year in 2012 and 2013 is allocated to make payment rate adjustments. After 2013 reimbursement adjustments will become budget neutral. Geographic variation in the utilization of services is addressed in the second IOM study on high value care. The IOM will make recommendations on how to transform the Medicare payment system to reward value and quality of care. Value is defined as the efficient delivery of high quality, evidence-based, patient-centered care. The study will be completed by April 15, 2011. No later than ninety days after the report is completed, the Secretary of HHS will submit to Congress a preliminary implementation plan based on the IOM study, which MedPac and GAO will evaluate within forty-five days. The IOM's quality and value-based payment recommendations will automatically go into effect unless the House and Senate pass joint resolutions of disapproval by May 31, 2012. The goal was to finish all studies and changes before the public option goes into effect in 2013 so the recommendations would be incorporated. This deal is a real victory for Washington state. Correcting the fundamental inequalities in Medicare reimbursement rates that underpay Washington state physicians will ensure access to Medicare physicians for Washington state seniors and Medicare beneficiaries. Additionally, this provision sets in motion a fundamental shift in the way we will reimburse for medical care going forward; moving away from a fee-for- service model and towards an outcome-based model. This shift will provide real cost containment by incentivizing and reimbursing for the quality, not the quantity, of medical care across the United States; saving the country billions of dollars. A compounded issue resulting from Medicare reimbursement disparity is the reliance on Medicare Advantage plans by Medicare beneficiaries in low cost areas. Medicare Advantage plans in Washington state have played a critical role in providing seniors with access to care because they have been able to reimburse providers at a higher rate than traditional Medicare, thereby attracting providers into the network who would otherwise be unable to treat Medicare beneficiaries due to cost. It is for this reason that I fought tirelessly to ensure a quality bonus for high-quality, efficient Medicare Advantage plans. Under the language I negotiated in the House bill, four-star rated plans and above, in the bottom thirty percent of costs to the system, would be eligible for a 1.5 percent bonus in 2011; a 3.0 percent bonus in 2012; and a 5.0 percent bonus for each subsequent year. These bonus payments will ensure the continuation of high quality health care for Medicare Advantage recipients in Washington state. Washington state is not only a leader in patient care, but also in medical innovation. The biotech industry is an important health care partner in Washington state. Across the state roughly 1,060 biotech companies employ 23,047 Washingtonians. The state ranks eighth in National Institute of Health grants and in the past two years academic bioscience research expenditures totaled $685 million. The innovation occurring in the state has lead to some of the leading biologic therapies for life-threatening illnesses such as cancer, multiple sclerosis, diabetes, HIV/AIDS and many serious rare diseases. Biologics are living organisms, different and more complex than small molecule drugs. Biotech medicines can be determined to be the ``same'' as the original drug, but science is not yet at a point where they can be determined to be ``identical.'' And even small differences between a copy and an original biologic can cause differences in effectiveness, and, in some cases, serious side effects. Therefore it is necessary that policy reflect the uniqueness of these therapies, and ensure drug efficacy and patient safety. I believe a pathway for the approval of biosimilar biologics is the critical next step to providing patients with increased access to lifesaving therapies. I also believe that we can create a pathway that provides patients with lower-cost medicine without sacrificing safety or eliminating incentives to create breakthrough medicines. This is why I, joined by my fellow committee members Anna Eshoo and Joe Barton, introduced H.R. 1548, the Pathway for Biosimilars Act. The legislation protects patients by ensuring patient safety, recognizing the scientific differences between small-molecule drugs and biologics, maintaining the physician-patient relationship, and preserving incentives for innovation. I was proud to co-sponsor an amendment in the Energy and Commerce Committee markup of H.R. 3200 that incorporated key pieces of our legislation. The amendment includes twelve years of data exclusivity for innovator biologics, ensuring not only that these life-changing and life-saving biologic treatments are more accessible and affordable, but that we also foster continued research and development investment needed to search for new cures and treatments. The strong bipartisan votes in both the House and Senate on this issue demonstrate that Congress is committed to a fair and safe pathway for biosimilars. I commend the House for adopting my legislation as part of HR 3962, and it is my sincere hope that it will be included in the final conference agreement. A few other provisions that I want to highlight are great examples of how Washington state's health care leadership has helped shape federal health care legislation. Earlier this year the state passed a common sense law that will save billions of dollars in administrative health care costs by standardizing insurance claims and forms processes, and I was proud to fight for the inclusion of similar language in the Affordable Health Care for America Act. Washington state has also been innovative in health care plan structures allowing for the emergence of direct primary care medical home plans that provide low cost coverage of primary care services. This model has granted access to care for a population that has been shut out from traditional health care coverage due to high costs. I was grateful to see the inclusion of this coverage model in the health care reform legislation. I am proud to represent a district and state that is leading the way on health care policy. Once again I would like thank Speaker Pelosi and the House leadership for their continued determination that brought all facets of the Democratic Caucus to the table and ensured that each member had a voice in the debate. As a result the House of Representatives has produced a health care reform bill that will provide access to affordable health care and bend the cost curve; and I am once again proud to offer my support.

Mr. INSLEE

Mr. INSLEE. Mr. Speaker, today in the days of 10 percent unemployment, it is particularly important to be fair to the American worker. And right now, there is a gross inequity to the American worker pending in the contract to acquire a new aerial fuel tanker by the U.S. Air Force. Right now, we know that one of the bidders, the Airbus company, has received grossly unfair multibillion dollar subsidies from the European Union countries. It is absolutely necessary for the United States Air Force to factor into this bid the illegal subsidies that Airbus consortium has received. It is inconceivable that one agency of the U.S. Government has found illegal subsidies by this bidder, and another agency may award a bid without taking into consideration the illegal subsidies found by the WTO. We are calling for the Air Force and the President to factor in these illegal subsidies so the American worker gets fairness. And that is what we deserve.

Mr. INSLEE

Mr. INSLEE. Well, with 10 percent unemployment, we know this country needs to act and we need to act quickly, and we need to act quickly in the job front of jobs that just won't be temporary and just won't be make-work jobs but will be part of the transition of our Nation to a Nation that can lead the world in the clean energy economy of the future. And we know that we have to get in that race for those jobs right now. We have bills pending, as we have already passed in the House the energy bill, which is now pending in the other Chamber; the stimulus bill, which is still in the process of being implemented; and we may have another bill on the floor of this House within the next month. All three of those bills are ways that we can jump-start the job growth in this economy by putting people to work on the jobs that are going to be the long-term jobs. I want to note something. Our President was in China yesterday. I believe he's still there today. I was there about 4 months ago meeting with Speaker Pelosi, the President, and the Premier of China, and I will tell you the risk our country really has is that there is a country across the Pacific who fully understands where the jobs of the future are going to be. And when we talked to the President and Premier of China, they made very clear that they were going to try to dominate these industries and dominate job creation in building electric cars, electric motors for electric cars, wind turbines, solar voltaic plants, solar thermal plants. The Chinese are spending about $12 million an hour on renewable energy job creation. They spent three times as much on their stimulus bill as we did on ours in job creation in clean energy. They want to dominate the job creation of the future. And we are determined in this Chamber to get in that race both in the energy bill we passed in August and in this job creation bill we hope to be considering in the next month on the floor to continue this job creation. I just want to mention two things that I think we ought to do very quickly. Number one, we should be putting thousands of Americans to work in retrofitting our homes and our businesses and our public buildings and our schools to make them energy efficient. We started down that road in the stimulus bill, but there's more we can do to put people to work putting insulation in our homes, putting new windows on our homes, putting more energy efficient heating and cooling systems in our homes, in our schools and our buildings; and we will be proposing to leadership in the House, actually, this afternoon of this Sustainable Energy and Environment Caucus four or five ways to promote that type of job creation. Second, we hope to use the Tax Code to continue incentive for Americans to make these kind of investments. We have a tax credit for homeowners right now, but it's just a credit you could take at the end of the year. We want to make that an advance so homeowners possibly can get the cash to work with this right now to hire people to put people to work in retrofitting their homes. We want to use the Tax Code to extend a couple of the tax credits that we're now using to develop job creation, for instance, the bio-fuel industry, that is expiring this December if we don't extend it. So there's just two ideas. I know we'll have some time tonight, but I would suggest that we could at least start at those two ideas.

Mr. INSLEE. And I may note, if I can, efficiency, some people think that means just turning off your lights when you're not in the room. Efficiency needs to be seen as a job creation engine because when you become efficient you do two things: one, you make investments in your infrastructure to make it more efficient. And when you make those investments, you hire sheet metal workers to do the duct work, you hire people in the construction trades to do the retrofitting, you hire people who are manufacturing energy efficient refrigerators and energy efficient air conditioners, and a whole slew of these new businesses. So efficiency is a job creator first. Secondly, after the efficiency is installed, you free up money for other investments. A business that can save 20 percent on its energy costs, and many businesses can, there's a company called McKinstry in Seattle which is leading the world and putting thousands of people to work. They're freeing up that money for businesses to make other investments. This is a job creator. We've just got to use the Tax Code on something like the PACE bonds, another idea that we will be proposing to leadership, to allow municipalities to float bonds, use that money to give to homeowners, let the homeowners retrofit their home and pay back the municipality on their property taxes. It's a surefire winner for everyone to get money to homeowners fast so that they can hire people to fix up their homes and have security for municipalities of getting paid back.

Mr. INSLEE. You made me think of something. You mentioned smart people and smart ideas. I had a very smart person in my office today. His name is Mike Town. He's an environmental science teacher at Redmond High School, the Redmond High School Mustangs in Redmond, Washington. Mike is leading a national effort called Cool Schools. It's something he started at Redmond High School to try to see if his high school could figure out how to not waste so much energy and save the school district money. They now have saved something like, it's about $25,000 a year just for their high school by doing some commonsense efficiency things that they have done and in investments they've made at Redmond High School. They now have a group called Cool Schools which are trying to get schools across the country to engage in this kind of a challenge to see how much energy you can save; and the brilliant ideas a lot of the kids are coming up with--kids meaning 15-, 16-, 17-, 18-year-olds--the ideas on how to green their schools that are making their schools a lot more cost effective so the taxpayer can save money, and a lot more green for the environment. And the kids learn a lot about science as well. I just mention it because the schools can be a factory of ideas, but it's a place to put some investment to save taxpayers money. When we make the public buildings more efficient, we save taxpayers money. But here's the challenge, and here's where I think our last energy bill, and perhaps our next jobs bill which might be on this floor in December sometime can really do a service. The challenge has been for homeowners, how to get the up-front financing to pay the contractor to fix your house up. Everybody knows that you might spend a few thousand dollars fixing your home up, and you're going to save a lot more over the long run because it's going to reduce your energy bill. But the question is, how do you come up with the scratch to do the first contract? Well, where we can help, and we're going to be proposing several ideas in this jobs bill that will essentially help the homeowner finance that, and there are several ways to do that: one, to give them an advance credit on the credit that now exists on your income taxes, to actually give an advance so you can pay the contractor to get it going. Second, we want to make it easier for cities to do what some cities like Boulder, Colorado are doing. They have a program where basically the city gives the money to the homeowner, the homeowner hires the contractor, then the homeowner pays the city back on their property tax. And it's a lien on the house, so the city knows they're going to get their money back. The city then issues a bond to generate the capital to pay for this program. We want to help some cities by guaranteeing that bond, they can sell it on the bond market for less money then and generate more bang for their buck. This is the kind of program that is just difficult really to see how it will fail, because almost any investment that people make to their homes seem to pay off in the long run in reduced energy bills. It's just getting that original capital to get going. So, as part of our jobs bill, we're going to be proposing a way to accelerate the ability of homeowners, small businesses, school districts, public utilities, can generate that capital to get the money investment done and then save money over the long run. And when we do that, everybody wins. I mean, I know this seems likes a no-brainer. Why isn't it happening naturally? It's not happening naturally because people can't get the capital to make these worthwhile investments. And when we do this we're putting carpenters to work, we're putting plumbers to work, we're putting sheet metal workers to work, we're putting truck drivers to work, we're putting architects to work, we're putting designers to work. This is really a sweet spot for us, and I hope that we can accelerate this.

Mr. INSLEE. I just want to make one comment before I leave. There is some really good news out here for America on the job front in clean energy. Two weeks ago on the Microsoft campus out in Washington State, I drove a Ford Focus, which will probably be the first American, mass- produced all-electric vehicle. And this car is the bomb. When Americans get in an all-electric car and understand how much torque an all- electric car can generate, this is the fastest car I've been in since I was in my buddy's Chevy 404 in 1968. When you hit the pedal, it's not a gas pedal, I guess we will call it the accelerator, they will still call it the gas pedal anyway, even though it's all-electric, unbelievable power is generated because an electric engine gives you immediate torque. In an internal combustion engine, you have the pistons and you have to get the momentum up. Electricity is immediate torque. Now everybody has been talking about electric cars because they are so efficient. They can wean us off of our Middle Eastern oil addiction, which is so dangerous to us. They can reduce global warming. But what Americans will really love is how fast they are and the acceleration you get from them. That will be the fun thing about them. The good news is we now have an opportunity to get thousands of Americans to work building electric cars, building plug-in hybrid cars. And General Motors has the Volt, which will be coming out. You plug it in, and it goes 40 miles on all electric, and then it has an internal combustion motor so you can go another 200, 250 miles without having to get another charge. They have taken a little different approach. Americans will have a choice of how to move forward in electric cars. The Tesla is already on the street, which is all-electric, which is the sportiest, fastest and most amazing-looking car you've ever seen. They're a little expensive right now, but they're working very well. The point I want to make, though, is we have got to jump-start this progress because the Chinese want to dominate this industry. And once they get a foot in the door internationally, you don't want to be the second place coming out of the chute in the provision for the electric car. And what we did in our energy bill and our stimulus bill has given very significant investment capability in the industry to produce these cars. We also did it for the batteries. We had $2 billion in the stimulus bill to try to jump-start a domestic lithium ion battery system to run these cars. Now there are some other things we can do perhaps even to move further to get jobs in these industries. The point I want to make is we can't sit around for 10 years and maybe do this 10 years from now. We have to do it right now for two reasons: one, we've got a 10 percent unemployment rate, and people are desperate out there. We know how trying and the anxiety that unemployment creates. It is one of the most difficult things for people who want to be productive, who want to take care of their families. This is very difficult for thousands of our fellow Americans right now. But, two, this is the opportunity of the lifetime or maybe several generations that we can't lose to these other countries. And so that is why it's important that the other Chamber pass this energy bill. That's why it is important in our upcoming jobs bill to investigate other ways. Here is one idea I hope will be considered in the jobs bill: we need to provide charging stations for people. If we are going to have electric cars, we need charging stations. And helping municipalities build these charging station networks is something we might be able to do to get electrical workers, IBEW members, machinists, electrical engineers employed, working with the infrastructure to create charging stations around the Nation. Now we don't need as many as you might think because 60 percent of all our trips are under 40 miles anyway, and these cars are going to have at least a 100-mile range. So most of our trips don't require a car that has 300 mileage. But we still need some in case you want to go a long distance. So I hope in our jobs bill we will consider ways to jump-start the building out of these electrical systems to get that job done. I want to thank you for letting me participate tonight. I look forward to our next discussion.

Mr. INSLEE

Mr. INSLEE. Mr. Speaker, health care is not a frivolity or a recreation; it is life itself. To a woman with early-onset breast cancer, health care is life itself. To a child with juvenile-onset diabetes, health care is life itself. It is well that we reflect how we founded this Union. We believe that all men are endowed with certain unalienable rights, and among those are the right to life--life--liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. We pass health care to honor life not just on parchment, but in practice. We pass health care because we cherish the lives of all Americans, not just our own. This is an American step in progress. It is an American right to life.

Mr. INSLEE

Mr. INSLEE. Mr. Speaker, I just want to relate one call from a small businessman who told me we needed health care reform so that his wife can finally start a small business of her own and be freed from the insurance industry that stopped her from getting insurance. I would like to enter into a colloquy with Mr. Waxman. Mr. Chairman, I would like to clarify section 1188, the generic fill provision in the bill. This section allows Medicare part D plans to waive patient's copays for generic, bioequivalent and biosimilar drugs. I believe that absent explicit approval from the patient's doctor, this inducement should only apply to those biosimilars that have been rated ``interchangeable'' by the FDA, meaning that they can be expected to produce the same clinical result in any given patient and switching medicines poses no greater risk than not switching. With respect to biosimilars that have not been rated as interchangeable, is it your intent that under this provision patients could not be switched to a non-interchangeable biosimilar drug without an explicit request by a patient and approval by their doctor?

Mr. INSLEE. Today we should pass this bill.

Mr. INSLEE

Mr. INSLEE. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the chairman and Mr. Upton for their leadership on this bill. I want to thank Mr. Markey for working with me to include language in the bill that recognizes the 17 research reactors in this country that have converted from highly enriched uranium to low enriched uranium fuel. One of these reactors is in my home State at Washington State University. This reactor can be used for medical isotope production with the use of highly enriched uranium. I would like to clarify with Mr. Markey that the purpose of section 3(a)(3) which allows reactors that are in the process of converting from highly enriched uranium to low enriched uranium fuel to qualify for funds under this bill. It is my understanding that this provision should not be interpreted as giving any preferences to these reactors and that all applicants for these funds will be given full and equal consideration. I yield to Mr. Markey.