Sheila Jackson Lee

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Thank you so very much. I just thought of something that I did want to add to the discussion. First of all, GE is an inherently American company, so I applaud the selection that allows a creator to move forward to create jobs for all of America. But I want to keep in mind that manufacturing is the employer of all people--women, persons with college educations, those that are in the trades, men, and young people. So families can be hired by manufacturing. And it is particularly important to me that women have the equal opportunity, particularly since we passed the pay equity bill in the last Congress. But, finally, I also look forward to small and medium minority women- owned businesses partnering with large businesses to create jobs because small businesses and minority-owned businesses can create jobs and are part of the infrastructure of jobs. So if the President speaks tomorrow, I hope he speaks for all of America, that all will have an opportunity to retrieve the dream by the opportunity to make it in America. I thank the gentleman for having us this evening.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. I want to thank the gentleman from California very much. I want to add my words of appreciation for having the opportunity to join you tonight and to join the minority whip, still my majority leader, Mr. Hoyer, who coined the phrase, as we were beginning to speak to the American people, of how important it is for us to go back to our roots. I am also delighted to be able to be here with the gentleman from Minnesota, the gentleman from New Jersey, and the gentleman from New York. But I want to spin it in a different way. I want us to reclaim America's genius. I could go back, of course, to the Model T or maybe even to Thomas Edison, with the light bulb. There is an excitement about being able to build, create, and invent-- frankly, when I came to Congress, I wondered why we were not making submarines anymore. As you well know, we had a shipbuilding industry in Virginia and, of course, in Mississippi--because genius also is part of building. You must have the kind of technology, the kind of expertise to make it the best equipment you possibly can have. That's what I sense that we have lost, and there is an excitement when young people can be part of the genius of America. I come from Houston, Texas. We are one of the new starts in light rail, and we have been trying to get there for about 30 years. We are just about there when we would be on the precipice of funding for light rail. Yet at the same time, as we talk about putting tracks down, there is a technology of the new light rail cars. We need to, in fact, build those cars here in the United States. Many people view Houston as the energy capital of the world. You don't know that we have wind and solar businesses that are headquartered in my congressional district. The point is, of course, that the turbines, unfortunately, are not built here. My point is, when the President so appropriately makes the point about investing in America and also of building infrastructure, he is speaking the language of capturing the genius of America. I would just hold this up because I think this is an example of where we are going. We are going onward and upward. The red is the past administration, which is when no jobs were created or maybe a minimum of a million. We can see we have had some hard times. We don't ignore the fact that we have been in a hard, hard recession. But look where we're going. How can we go backwards? How can we not create more jobs? We in Houston would really like to be part of not sending our tax dollars overseas. We want to be able to build buses, railcars, ferryboats, submarines, and large-sized ships, if you will, because that is capturing the genius of America. So let me thank the gentleman for yielding. I am hoping the President will indicate to us, Mr. Hoyer and to all who are here on the floor, that he is going to go forward on his investment in infrastructure and in recapturing the genius of America.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. I thank my good friend from Massachusetts for yielding. Madam Speaker, let me say that the good news is that the only thing that occurred last evening was simply a vote, because the law of the land is still the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. I hope that the President's words are not twisted, because I agree with him: we are all willing to work together to do the right thing, which is to amend a bill. I don't understand the understanding of my friends on the other side of the aisle. Repealing the law of the land has nothing to do with questioning some of the provisions. Frankly, they're not even listening to a distinguished doctor, Senator Frist, the former majority leader, who said this bill--our bill--is the law of the land, and it is the fundamental platform upon which all future efforts to make that system better for that patient and that family will be based. What is there not to understand? Amend the bill. Don't repeal it. In fact, Senator Frist said if the bill were on the floor, he would have voted for it. I spoke to some students the other day, and they asked about doctors. This bill has in it scholarships for medical professionals, the bill that we have. In fact, the issue, of course, is one that you cannot dispute: this bill saves lives, so much so that the Republican majority leader ran to the media to promise seniors that they wouldn't lose the $250 that our bill, the patient protection bill, guaranteed them so that they would have some cover, some cushion, for their prescription drugs. So, my friends, I know we are doing the right thing. We are all willing to amend, but how ridiculous it is that you would repeal the law of the land or attempt to do so. I know the President still has his veto pen--because this bill will save lives.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. I thank the gentleman from Vermont, and I am just very pleased to have heard my good friends from New York, Ms. Clarke and Mr. Weiner, and my good friend from Maryland. I hope this is a comforting Special Order because even as we speak, I think it is enormously important because people look at this because they saw a debate and they saw a vote, and now we are here on the floor of the House. I want them to know this bill is the law of the land. What we are trying to explain to them is the potential devastation of that bill being repealed. The good news is that this was a payback to those who voted for my good friends on the other side of the aisle, Republicans, and we understand that. But lives are involved. To the distinguished gentleman from Vermont, lives are actually involved. I just have a few points that I want to characterize this debate as and to give people comfort that we are still fighting for this law. This law is in place. Right now, the elimination of lifetime caps: you can still use this bill. The idea that seniors, some 40 million of them, beginning in January 2011 will begin receiving savings on preventative care services: you can still use this. This is very important, the 50 percent discount. If anybody had an earful from the seniors, it was the doughnut hole. At every senior citizen center you go to, they're talking about the choices I have to make between food and rent and prescription drugs. I want them to know the law is still in place. I know there was a debate on the floor of the House. I know there was a vote, but it should be well known that Democrats put up an able fight. More importantly, we know that our President will be working to preserve the law that exists. That's very important. In having listened to a gentleman by the name of Ed, first name Ed, who has a chronic disease--hemophilia--he told a very important story of how he and his brother grew up with that and how he lives well today because of the fact that we have passed the elimination of lifetime caps. So he can be treated. He can work. He has insurance. That is why when people ask, How does this impact me? Those of you who have insurance, we are not taking it away from you; but I assure you you have lifetime caps. What about the young woman and her son who came to my town hall meeting who said, in tears, Congresswoman Sheila--whatever they call me--we had insurance. We went to a doctor for a physical for my son who had to get a physical to get into school--every child has to get a physical at the beginning of the school year--and the doctor turned me away and said, Your insurance only covers emergency room. We won't have that kind of half-baked insurance anymore. So I quickly want to do this, Mr. Welch. There was a big discussion about the constitutionality of this bill, and I got into another big discussion with one of our wonderful pundits who wanted to argue about whether someone would die without this health insurance. This is a Medicare patient, or someone who is using Medicare. It indicates that she spent the week of New Year's of 2008 in an emergency room, and then was confined to her home for weeks because she developed pneumonia. She says she had never been so sick in her life. The good news was, in 2008, she had a government-run health care provision, a Medicare program, that allowed her to discover her sickness and to be treated. Her very words: For a time, I was so sick I was afraid I was going to die. Then I was so sick I was afraid I wouldn't, and I was miserable. The real question is: even though she is a senior, this government- run program allowed her to get care, and she didn't die. Sometimes walking pneumonia, as everyone knows, is not anything to play around with. Why are my friends on the other side of the aisle complaining about a government-run program? This program has not been ruled unconstitutional, and it has been in place since 1965. So when they make the argument and it frightens our seniors who are listening and they're saying, This vote, do we not have it? You have Medicare. We are enhancing Medicare. We are making it solvent. 2037. This is what this bill will do for you. Then let me just conclude with this. This is probably not readable, but this is my State celebrating the bill. This is the Texas Department of Insurance that has just put out a report celebrating all of the provisions of this bill that will help the millions of uninsured. You all know that Texas has the highest number of uninsured in the Nation. We are obviously a growing State with the highest number. This is not a Democratic Texas Department of Insurance. I only say that to say other States are doing the same. Moneys are now flowing to States to ease the burden of health care. So I don't know what my friends on the other side of the aisle are doing when States are receiving money now, when people have no more lifetime caps, when young people can be on their parents' insurance because of the issue of being 26 years old. Then there is this legal argument--and this is the conclusion. I carry this book around. The commerce clause has covered our health bills or a number of Federal provisions that we have used, and we have not seen them overturned, and we haven't seen Medicare overturned. Yet there is another element that, I think, raises a question for my colleagues, and I hope that those who are now in the courts on this bill--and it is the courts that make the determination of the constitutionality, not this Congress, not people who are responding to a campaign or to promises they made. I think they'd have to look at the question of the 14th Amendment and the equal protection of the law. Does that mean that those who can only pay a certain amount and get low-caliber insurance should be taken advantage of, or does it mean that small businesses that would like to provide insurance for their employees don't have a right to some form of equal protection of the law? We thought about that. That's what this bill does. It helps to equalize access to quality health care, and the Fifth Amendment clearly states that no one can deprive you of life or liberty or property. So there are a lot of provisions that, I think, are meritorious in any argument to suggest that this is an unconstitutional act that we did. We equalized the playing field as opposed to depriving people of the equal playing field. I thank the gentleman for having this. There are a whole bunch of items that we can comment on. Every State is benefiting. Every district is benefiting. I don't know how my friends could vote against actual direct benefits when the people in their States are jumping for joy. This bill is in place, and it is the law of the land. Let it be very clear: it is the law of the land.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Just a quick point. Number one is the benefit you just mentioned in a State like Texas, this retiree program. And we have a very quixotic or very complicated retirement program for teachers. And I will just say in closing, State legislators are beginning to go back to their capitals to try and understand how they're going to face these enormous deficits. I can't understand why we are burdening now States, by this vote, with extra responsibilities when they are all in crisis. The bill we have saves jobs, creates jobs, and provides benefits for people who need it and States who are in trouble.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, thank you so very much. I look forward to working with you. It's time to bust a number of myths. It's time to really tell the Americans the truth. As we begin another series of 5-hour debates on repealing a life-saving initiative, it's really time to tell the truth. Maybe it's time to tell the truth about this senior citizen, who had pneumonia and didn't know she had it. But if she had not had ``a government-run health system,'' Medicare, she wouldn't be laying up in a sophisticated medical facility, providing her with the opportunity to live. Any of you know about pneumonia--walking pneumonia can kill you. It killed my grandfather, who did not have access to this quality health care because he did not have Medicare. It's time to bust the myths. It's time to tell our physicians that Democrats worked hard to build up your reimbursement. We were the leaders on it. This has nothing to do with the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, because as this bill grows with research dollars, we also have the opportunity, with the President, to work on reimbursement. This bill is a bill to save lives. And those in Texas know it, Mr. Speaker, because the Texas insurance agency said it is a good bill.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. I thank the gentleman from California, but more importantly I thank him for really turning the light bulb on. We worked so hard on this legislation that we probably have forgotten to articulate all of the nuances of this bill. It is unbelievable. I hesitated to use the term ``frivolous'' today, but, frankly, I'm saddened by the fact that we had to engage in a frivolous debate. So I just wanted to say to the gentleman, some years ago under the Bush administration I took note of the fact that we did not have enough community health clinics, frankly, and I am so glad that our collective research caused us to put that legislation in the bill. Last Monday, I convened my community health clinics. It was amazing the expanded work they do because some of them received stimulus dollars. One of my clinics was able to open up 21 legacy, and one of my community health clinics was able to open up 21 new patient rooms because of stimulus dollars. But what I want to say on that point is three things: Community health clinics help seniors and families. And to seniors, this gives you, in addition to the comfort of being nearby your home, but you get, in addition, a primary home or a medical home. You can use that clinic, that doctor to be part of your medical home. The community health clinics can then multiply themselves or improve themselves by having electronic records where, as a senior who has extended medical records, can you imagine in the future what happens with seniors when they can put all their data into electronic records to be able to track seniors and to assure their good health? So contrary to frightening seniors and talking about death panels, this bill provides community clinics, a medical home, electronic records, and the inevitable closing of the doughnut hole so that seniors do not have to choose between paying rent and buying food and getting their brand drugs that they need. So I just wanted to say there's so much. And then as you mentioned your daughter and the training. That's creating jobs. How do they talk about losing jobs--which I think, by the way, again, is frivolous because we created 1.1 million jobs. And, frankly, I would just say to you that this is about saving lives. Jobs are very important. We've created jobs. But even the title of their legislation, H.R. 2, ``job-killing''? This is killing Americans if we take this bill away, if we repeal this bill. So I would argue that maybe my good friends--who some of them are new and I appreciate their newness; I appreciate their desire to keep a commitment to constituents. But when you come to the Congress, you have to govern. You have to look at the whole of America. And therefore, looking at the whole of America, you need to look at the crux. The crux is saving lives. So I thank the gentleman for bringing us to this point. I know that we will be getting another hour that I hope maybe I will have an opportunity to share some thoughts. But again, I will yield back my time and just say this is about saving lives.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. I thank the gentlelady. It is a pleasure to be able to join my colleagues on the floor, including Congressman Gregory Meeks of New York, who we'll have the opportunity to hear from, and I thank Dr. Christensen for your continued leadership, and my colleague on Judiciary Committee, we had the opportunity to contribute to the debate today. The Judiciary Committee has as its jurisdiction the Constitution, and our friends on the other side of the aisle keep talking about that this is unconstitutional. It baffles me and almost frustrates me because I'm trying to grab hold to what the argument is, particularly since we have had Medicare by the Federal Government since 1965, and it has withstood any constitutional challenge, and that was implemented under the Commerce Act. But frankly, if we have an argument to make on the Constitution, I will share with you why this is clearly a constitutional bill, because we are actually denying people both due process and equal protection under the law under the present system because we have a nation that is divided between the haves and have-nots. Forty million-plus, 44 million, now I hear 32 million persons were uninsured. That's what grabbed our attention. Those people did not have access to health care. Clearly, if you look at the Constitution that says that the 14th Amendment says equal protection under the law, all people treated equally, and the Fifth Amendment says can't deprive someone of life or liberty without due process. Well, I can tell you over the time that we debated this bill we saw the numbers of people who actually died because they could not get access to health care. We are reminded of our good colleague, Congressman Cummings, who told the story over and over again of a young teenager, 12- or 13-year-old boy, African American boy, who had an abscess, a tooth abscess, and clearly could have been saved, his life was before him. But he died because his mother did not have insurance or really did not have access to go anywhere to have this particular health matter taken care of. It became a crisis, and he died. So I want to say to my friends, these are the basic points that I want to raise today while I discuss this question of the 14th Amendment and the Fifth Amendment. First of all, you hear the question of how offended people are, I don't want to be told to buy insurance. Why should I have to be forced to buy insurance? Well, as everyone knows, there is a 10th Amendment that says what is not left to the Federal Government is given to the States. States require you to have auto insurance. If you do not have it, you are fined. You get a ticket. Because they have calculated that the burden of not having health insurance is too great to bear. And so when we think of people not having health insurance because they don't have access, we have determined that the burden is too great to bear, $143 billion if this bill is repealed right away, and $1 trillion over 20 years that we will lose, or the deficit will be built. And I would imagine it might be more if you determine the people that will be uninsured who will go on to the county system. Does everybody know in these districts around the Nation who are complaining about this bill that your hospitals, your county hospitals that are burdening your local taxpayers will be actually compensated for uncompensated care? I don't know about anyone here, but I can tell you my hospitals are jumping for joy. And so I just want to point this out. Children with preexisting conditions are denied coverage, that is the sickle cell child, that is the individual with heart disease. We determined in our Democratic Policy and Steering Committee that children are the greatest that have the possibility of dying because of lack of coverage. And so all of these children, asthma, parents who have children with asthma, they are born, and there are babies with asthma. Do you realize they cannot or could not get insurance even on their parents' insurance? Asthma. How many children have died with asthma? Particularly in the minority community, where we have been subjected to poor quality living conditions. Maybe the air quality, because of where we live, industrial waste, or maybe it is because of the quality of the house that you are in, asbestos, other ailments that create conditions that cause respiratory illnesses in children, those are respiratory illnesses, young people age 26. A young man by the name of Andrew today said he's been working very hard, he graduated from college, but unfortunately the job that he had offered to him has been pushed back because of the economy. He is working to get more experience as an intern with no compensation. His family cannot afford to keep him on to pay for independent insurance at this point. But yet he is being constructive, and he can be constructive because he can be on his parents' insurance. Pregnant women and breast and prostate cancer patients, in particular, African American women and minority women have a devastating form of breast cancer. My father had prostate cancer, and at the age he was and the atmosphere that we were in and the medical access he had at that time, one, he didn't tell the family, two, we were uninformed about this thing called prostate cancer, and we didn't find out about it until it had metastasized. My father actually had lung cancer and brain cancer. There is a statistic: An African American male over 65 that did not have the proper access to health care to be able to catch his prostate cancer. Now this bill will provide for preventive care so that members, no matter what economic station you are in or status you are in, you have the ability to access health care, meaning you can go to a community health clinic or the community health centers, excuse me, or you may be able to buy your own health insurance at the rate in the amount you can. There is a complaint here, as I said, about lacking the ability or not wanting to buy health insurance. Well, I would argue to that person, the argument I made about the 10th Amendment and automobile insurance, but I also argue, would you rather have these individuals die or burden the massive public health system? Or would you rather have them have access to be healthy as opposed to being sick? Then something has been said, job-killing bill. And one of the points that the Republicans make is 650,000 jobs lost. They are not telling the accurate story. The 650,000 jobs lost are people deciding not to work or to work less because they now have the ability to get their own insurance that is not tied to a job through the exchange. That is the accuracy of it. It's voluntary, voluntary separation from a job because I am independent now to be able to go into business, to be a sole entrepreneur, a sole proprietor, and still have my insurance. And so these people would immediately be thrown off because a pregnant woman would be considered a preexisting disease; breast cancer, obviously one of the more devastating diseases; prostate cancer. And do you know what else? Heart disease which kills or has 43 million women today living with heart disease, some of whom do not know it because they do not have preventive care. And then, our seniors have been frightened by death panels. Seniors, let me simply say to you, there will be living panels because you will get a 50 percent discount on your doughnut hole process and brand name prescription drugs. But more importantly, you'll be able to have a primary care doctor, you'll have community health clinics you can go to, you'll have what we call a medical home so you won't have to be worrying about, who is my doctor? You will have a consistent doctor, maybe even electronic records. Particularly hard-hit are minority seniors or seniors in rural areas where hospitals are not even. But if they can go to a community health clinic that can diagnose them so they don't have to go to an emergency room or be helicoptered to a major city because they reached a crisis, seniors, this is a living bill for you. And then, of course, this whole question of the deficit, I've already mentioned, but this idea of small businesses, let me tell you that small businesses are jumping for joy. Dr. Odetta Coin today said to us that she is glad that her pediatric practice will be able to get tax credits for her employees to provide health care and that she will be able to add another nurse practitioner just because this bill provides for small businesses. So I can only say that this whole question of job loss is shaky, the whole question of the Constitution is shakier, and I conclude by saying this, and I will be on the floor again tomorrow: The Constitution has been misused in this debate. I beg of people to get the Constitution. It is quite the opposite. H.R. 2 is unconstitutional, because it creates an unequal system in America, a system of unequalness as relates to health care. We've lived that way but we have not been able to get those who have been most deprived to take this case up all the way to the Supreme Court. Why did I not have health insurance? Why does my neighbor have it and I don't have it? Well, we are now equalizing. With the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, we're giving you the protection of the Constitution to the 14th Amendment and the Fifth Amendment of due process and equal protection. I can't imagine a better way to value America than to say that all of us deserve the dignity of our flag and our Constitution. I thank the gentlelady, Dr. Christensen, for her leadership.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, I have listened for a couple of hours to the debate on health care and will have additional hours going forward tomorrow. I think it is important that each Member look carefully at their own congressional area and as well their own State. I hope maybe I will be able to convince a few Members of the reality of the State of Texas. And by the way, I don't know how far this legislation will go. We expect a victory on the repeal tomorrow. I don't want Americans to be frightened who need this bill. Mr. President, be prepared to use your veto pen. But Texas is the number one State with uninsured. Health care premiums have grown five times faster than income, and 500,000 middle class workers have lost their private insurance. In Harris County, where many of us live, more than 800,000 will be put on the health care rolls if this bill continues to go forward, meaning the Patient Protection bill. But if the repeal goes, we'll throw 800,000 people to the wolves. There is a reason to support this bill, particularly in Texas, which has an enormous number of uninsured.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, you are absolutely right. This is a constitutional question that has been raised, and as I came to the floor earlier, I mentioned my predecessor, Congresswoman Jordan, who believed in this Constitution without question. I mentioned the 14th Amendment. I now mention the Fifth Amendment. First of all the commerce clause covers this bill, but the Fifth Amendment speaks specifically to denying someone their life and liberty without due process. That is what H.R. 2 does, and I rise in opposition to it. And I rise in opposition because it is important that we preserve lives and we recognize that 40 million plus are uninsured. In my own county, Harris County, this bill will allow some 800,000 uninsured members of Harris County, citizens of Harris County, to be insured in Texas. In addition, the Texas Department of Insurance, as many other States, have already begun implementing this bill, the patient protection bill, gladly so, and saying it will help save lives and provide for the families of their States. Can you tell me what is more unconstitutional than taking away from the people of America their Fifth Amendment rights, their 14th Amendment rights, and the right to equal protection under the law? I know that Mr. Land, who suffers from schizophrenia with his family; Ms. Betty, who had to go to the ER room in Texas because of no insurance; Mrs. Smith who was on dialysis; or Mrs. Fields whose mother couldn't get dental care, I know they would question why we're taking away their rights. Today we stand before this body, we beg of them to ask themselves whether this is all about politics or about the American people. I am prepared to extend a hand of friendship, standing on the Constitution, to enable us to provide for all of the citizens of this country. This bill has been vetted, this bill is constitutional, and it protects the constitutional rights of those who ask the question: Must I die, must my child die because I am now disallowed from getting insurance? To our seniors, there are no death panels. This is about your primary care doctor. This is about closing the doughnut hole that will allow you to be able to get discounts on your prescription drugs that some of you have avoided because you have to pay your rent and you have to buy your food. Texas, a big State, has already said through a governmental agency, we need this bill. And we hope that those who come from our State and many other States will not vote against the protection of patients. Vote against H.R. 2 and provide yourself with the protection of the Constitution. Madam Speaker, I stand in strong opposition to the Patient's Rights Repeal Act. As a Member of Congress I take seriously my responsibility and sworn oath to serve my constituents and improve the lives of all citizens of this country for the better. The Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution states that, ``No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.'' The last portion of this amendment, commonly called the Equal Protection Clause, is one of the most important portions of the Constitution, which was added after the Civil War and was the basis for most of the civil rights decisions that transformed this country. Furthermore, many of the legal arguments for demanding medical treatment have also rested on this clause, which the U.S. Supreme Court relied on in its Roe v. Wade decision. Repealing the healthcare reform we enacted last year would be a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution since it would be abridging the fundamental right of U.S. citizens to have health care and would be denying them the equal protection under the law guaranteed to them by the 14th Amendment. Furthermore, even the Founding Fathers more than two centuries ago emphasized the fundamental importance of good health. Thomas Jefferson stated that, ``Without health there is no happiness. And attention to health, then, should take the place of every other object . . . The most uninformed mind, with a healthy body, is happier than the wisest valetudinarian.'' I urge President Obama that should any repeal of any beneficial portion of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act come to his desk, he should utilize his presidential prerogative to veto this legislation which would harm the fundamental rights of Americans. As health care reform takes a particularly partisan tone, this Nation, as of January 2011, still has more than 20 million Americans according to the U.S. Census Bureau who live without health insurance. To my colleagues across the aisle, have you truly considered what this repeal would mean and who this would affect? Sadly to say, in my district, the 18th Congressional District of Houston, Texas, the repeal would be devastating. To highlight a few major effects of the repeal for my district, please listen as I explain several devastating changes to health care coverage that a number of populations throughout the 18th Congressional District of Houston, Texas, will face. The repeal would increase drug costs for seniors. There are 5,300 Medicare beneficiaries in my district who are expected to benefit from these provisions. Repeal would increase the average cost of prescription drugs for these Medicare beneficiaries by over $500 in 2011 and by over $3,000 in 2020. The repeal would deny seniors new preventive and wellness care improving primary and coordinated care, and enhancing nursing home care. The repeal would eliminate these benefits for 70,000 Medicare beneficiaries in the district and cause the Medicare trust fund to become insolvent in just six years. The repeal would eliminate tax credits for small businesses. The health reform law provides tax credits to small businesses worth up to 35 percent of the cost of providing health insurance. There are up to 14,600 small businesses in my district, small businesses that are eligible for this tax credit. This repeal would force these small businesses to drop coverage or bear the full costs of coverage themselves. The repeal would increase retiree health care costs for employers. The health reform law provides funding to encourage employers to continue to provide health insurance for their retirees. As many as 5,500 district residents who have retired but are not yet eligible for Medicare could ultimately benefit from this early retiree assistance. The repeal would increase costs for employers and jeopardize the coverage their retirees are receiving. The repeal would increase the cost of uncompensated care born by hospitals. The Health Reform Law benefits hospitals by covering more Americans and thereby reducing the cost of providing care to the uninsured. The repeal would undo this benefit, increasing the cost of uncompensated care by $27 million annually for hospitals in my district. As evidenced in the recent elections, the public has indicated they want less spending and a balanced budget. The Congressional Budget Office estimates the budget will be negatively impacted to the tune of $230 billion dollars over a 10 year period if healthcare reform is repealed. Additionally, more than four million small businesses would lose health insurance tax credits as a result of repeal, and the cost of offering employer-based health insurance could increase by more than $3,000 annually, according to the U.S. Public Interest Research Group. As a Congress we have continued to debate this issue for decades without resolve. The uninsured, the underserved, vulnerable and minority communities are particularly at risk. Lest we forget--in 1999 we asked the Institute of Medicine--the independent organization whose reports are considered the gold standard for health care policymakers-- to investigate disparities in health and health care among racial and ethnic minorities. The results were damning: the ensuing study, Unequal Treatment: Confronting Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Health Care, found that minorities had poorer health and were consistently receiving lower-quality health care even when factors such as insurance status and income weren't involved. As stated by Newsweek, minorities and the underserved were less likely to get lifesaving heart medications, bypass surgery, dialysis, or kidney transplants. They were more likely to get their feet and legs amputated as a treatment for late-stage diabetes.--Mary Carmichael, The Great Divide, Newsweek, February 15, 2010. In our current system, most people do not choose to be uninsured but are priced out of insurance. These people cannot, as free market proponents often argue, ``pull themselves up by their bootstraps.'' Instead, they and their families are too often cyclically and systemically trapped in their economic situation. As a result, minority communities suffer grave health disparities that would otherwise be limited but for lack of access to affordable and quality care. What is the price for improving the life expectancy of millions of Americans of all ages? In 2007, only 49 percent of African-Americans in comparison to 66 percent of non-Hispanic whites used employer-sponsored health insurance, according to the Department of Health and Human Services. During the same year, 19.5 percent of African-Americans in comparison to 10.4 percent of non-Hispanic whites were uninsured. Hispanics have the highest uninsured rates of any racial or ethnic group within the United States. In 2004, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported that private insurance coverage among Hispanic subgroups varied as follows: 39.1 percent of Mexicans, 47.3 percent of Puerto Ricans, 57.9 percent of Cubans, and 45.1 percent of other Hispanic and Latino groups. Health care reform also is critical to ensure that women have access to affordable health care coverage. An estimated 64 million women do not have adequate health insurance coverage. About 1.7 million women have lost their health insurance coverage since the beginning of the economic downturn. Nearly two-thirds lost coverage because of their spouse's job loss. And nearly 39 percent of all low-income women lack health insurance coverage. Women also are more likely to deplete their savings accounts paying medical bills than men because they are more likely to be poor. This bill gives women access to the health care that they need and deserve. Health care reform is a critical step in helping to reduce such health disparities. Are we now telling the American public we will not? Lower costs for minority families and all Americans should forget about preventive care for better health. Racial and ethnic minorities are often less likely to receive preventive care. Vietnamese women, for example, are half as likely to receive a pap smear, and twice as likely to die from cervical cancer as are whites. Obesity rates are also high among certain minority groups. By ensuring all Americans have access to preventive care and by investing in public health, health insurance reform will work to create a system that prevents illness and disease instead of just treating it when it's too late and costs more. Are we telling the citizens of this country that we will not? Make health care accessible to everyone. African Americans, Hispanics, and Native Americans are roughly twice as likely to be uninsured as the rest of the population. By providing health insurance choices to all Americans and providing premium assistance to make it affordable, health insurance reform significantly reduces disparities in accessing the best quality for health. We will you tell your constituents that you will not: Control chronic disease and promote primary care. Nearly half of African Americans suffer from a chronic disease, compared with 40 percent of the general population. Chronic illness is growing in other minority communities as well. Health insurance reform is slated to include a number of programs to prevent and control chronic disease, including incentives to provide medical homes and chronic disease management pilots in Medicare. By investing in the primary care workforce (including scholarships and grants to increase diversity in health professions), health reform will make sure that all Americans have access to a primary care doctor and strengthen the system of safety-net hospitals and community health centers to ensure accessible care. The people of my home State of Texas, in particular, with 6 million uninsured persons, and 26 percent uninsured in my district, have been hit especially hard when it comes to lack of access to quality, affordable care. Many Americans continue to be forced from their health care plans due to decisions by insurance companies that consider profit over people. So how do the million plus Houston residents without an insurance company get health care--the emergency room, ER! Emergency rooms have become the health care providers of last resort for well over 100 million Americans annually. Will we allow this trend to continue? Over a 10 year period from 1994 to 2004, ER visits on a national level saw an 18 percent jump, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Emergency rooms in Houston hospitals are routinely overcrowded as overused as throngs flock seeking care for ailments that may range from a heart attack or gunshot wound to an ear infection or toothache. ER overcrowding is so bad in the Houston area, that patients have called 911 from one ER to get to another, according to one report. When the President signed the health care bill into law, he ensured that Americans who have been flocking to emergency rooms for primary care will have another option--affordable and accessible health care. Repealing the health act is not in the best interest of Americans. Health is not partisan and we should not treat it as such. Will we tell the citizens of this great Nation, we will not? Bar insurance companies from discriminating based on pre-existing conditions, health status, and gender; create health insurance exchanges--competitive marketplaces where individuals and small business can buy affordable health care coverage in a manner similar to that of big businesses today; offer premium tax credits and cost- sharing assistance to low and middle income Americans, providing families and small businesses with the largest tax cut for health care in history; insure access to immediate relief for uninsured Americans with pre-existing conditions on the brink of medical bankruptcy; invest substantially in community health centers to expand access to health care in communities where it is needed most; empower the Department of Health and Human Services and State insurance commissioners to conduct annual reviews of new plans demanding unjustified, egregious premium increases; expand eligibility for Medicaid to include all non-elderly Americans with income below 133 percent of the federal poverty level (FPL); replace the so-called ``cornhusker'' deal with fair assistance for all States to help cover the costs of these new Medicaid populations; maintain current funding levels for the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) for an additional two years, through fiscal year 2015; and increase payments to primary care doctors in Medicaid. Increased costs for families and business in the current economy cannot be best for the Nation. Before we rush headlong toward repeal, we must consider the consequences and look for solutions that hold down costs, not increase them. In opposition to H.R. 2, I offered several amendments to protect the millions of Americans who are at risk of the legislation that is before the body of Congress today. Specifically, my amendments would amend the legislation to make no further reduction in Medicare and Medicaid fraud and would prevent the abuse of activities below the level that would be provided under Title VI and Subtitle F of Title X of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and Sections 1106 and Subtitle D of Title I of the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, Public Law 111-152. My amendment stated that this repeal shall not take effect unless and until the Director of Office of Management and Budget in collaboration with the Director of the Congressional Budget Office certifies to Congress that this repeal will not result in any decrease in Medicare and Medicaid fraud and abuse prevention activities below the level provided in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Health care fraud and abuse has been a national problem, prevalent in Federal, State and private insurance programs, costing this Nation billions of dollars each year. Fraud can result in improper payments, but it is not the only cause of wasteful spending in Federal health care programs. Payments for unnecessary medical services, for claims with insufficient documentation, for ineligible patients and to ineligible providers, are examples of improper expenditures that waste taxpayer dollars and drive up health care costs. Fraud and abuse account for one-fifth, an estimated $125 to $175 billion of that waste. This is staggering. Continuing to uncover fraud and abuse will assist in covering the costs of health reform, allowing us to keep the services so many Americans rely upon, while reducing the deficit. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that every $1 invested to fight fraud yields approximately $1.75 in savings. Through FY 2009, the Department of Justice's civil division and U.S. Attorneys' Offices have recovered nearly $16 billion in matters alleging fraud against government health care programs. As we look to make non-partisan decisions that will benefit the American people and guarantee fair and equitable health care coverage, the Obama administration has taken steps to significantly improve oversight of the Medicare Part C and Part D programs. These steps have sought to tailor interventions towards the areas where fraud and abuse are the greatest. Efforts have been implemented to invest in critical data infrastructure, enhanced field operations at Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services, the Office of Inspector General, and Department of Justice, and initiated new efforts to reduce improper payments. On July 2010, U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary, Kathleen Sebelius and U.S. Attorney General, Eric Holder launched a series of regional health care fraud prevention summits. These summits brought together a range of Federal, State and local partners, beneficiaries, providers, and other interested parties to discuss innovative ways to eliminate fraud within our U.S. health care system. Tools contained in the Affordable Care Act serve to safeguard taxpayer dollars and ensure health care coverage for seniors, families and children are secure. The Nation's health care system has been victimized by health care fraud perpetrators whose objective is to line their pockets at the expense of the American taxpayer, patients, and private insurers. This not only drives up costs for everyone in the health care system, it cripples the long term solvency of Medicare and Medicaid, two programs upon which millions of Americans depend. This particular amendment was essential to hold State and local partners, beneficiaries, providers, and others accountable to their patients and communities and ensure these new policies are used in an effective manner to yield the best possible outcome. Regarding community health centers, I offered an amendment that would prevent Section 2 of House Bill H.R. 2 from taking effect unless and until the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, in consultation with the Director of the Congressional Budget Office, certifies to Congress that the repeal of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Public Law 111-148) will not result in an elimination of any increased funding to community health centers provided under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act or the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 and will not result in any decrease in the number of community health centers, and will not otherwise disallow further expansions of community healthcare centers. It is important to protect the historic healthcare legislation which we fought so hard to enact in order to provide the accessible, affordable and quality healthcare that all Americans deserve and so many Americans receive through community healthcare centers. Community health centers are poised to play a vital role in the implementation of the Affordable Care Act and emphasize coordinated primary and preventive services. These centers also provide preventive services. Routine health care that includes screenings, check-ups, and patient counseling to prevent illnesses, disease, or other health problems. Offer a medical home to the most vulnerable and medically underserved--low-income individuals, racial and ethnic minorities, rural communities and other underserved populations to address and reduce health disparities. Community health centers continue to show their ability to manage patients with multiple health care needs, and implement key quality improvement practices, including health information technology. For more than forty years, health centers have delivered quality, comprehensive preventive and primary care to patients regardless of their ability to pay. With a proven track record of success, and the advent of 350 new community health care centers being established in fiscal year 2011, a repeal of the Affordable Care Act will threaten the very fabric of this Nation's health care system. Currently, more than 1,100 community health centers operate 7,900 service delivery sites and provide care to nearly 19 million patients in every state, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and the Pacific Basin. The Affordable Healthcare Act included enhanced funding for operations and start-ups of federally qualified health centers in the Harris County Hospital district, which is in the 18th Congressional District of Texas, my home district, thereby increasing the availability of primary health care and preventive health care services. The Affordable Healthcare Act also provided funding for and policy direction to increase the number of primary care providers in the Harris County Hospital district and the state of Texas, inclusive of physicians and physician extenders (advanced nurse practitioners). The Affordable Healthcare Act also directed states to increase provider payment rates to physicians in the Medicaid program. This is significant in that rates are so low in Texas many physicians are unwilling to take Medicaid patients. According to the Texas Health and Human Services Commission Study, there are currently 1.1 million uninsured in Harris County, Texas. Full implementation of health care reform would reduce that number to a little over 390,000. That represents a 65 percent reduction in the number of uninsured residents. Diminished access to primary and preventive health care services that in turn will lead to a moreover use of acute care hospital inpatient services and emergency center encounters at much higher costs to county taxpayers and higher Medicaid per capita expenditures for the state and Federal government. Without reform, cuts to the Medicare and Medicaid program will put a greater strain on existing safety net providers and local tax payers. Without expanded care and insurance reforms, people will not have access to affordable, lower cost health care services. Specifically, in my Congressional district, the South Central Houston Community Health Center has been serving the Houston community since 1994 and has locations in the Sunnyside and Third Wards areas of Houston. By being the oldest, Federally qualified health center in the city of Houston, the community health center has grown to receive over 1.2 million in annual Federal funds, which is instrumental in providing quality health care to the medically underserved, uninsured, and underinsured people of the greater Houston area. The South Central Houston Community Health Center has made tremendous progress towards eliminating healthcare disparities and increasing access to healthcare services to the Houston community. The Legacy Community Health Center in my Congressional district has also benefitted greatly from the Affordable Healthcare Act. The Legacy Community Health Center is a full-service, community health center that provides comprehensive, primary healthcare services to all Houstonians in a culturally sensitive, judgment-free and confidential environment. Legacy has specialized in HIV/AIDS testing, education, treatment and social services since the early 1980's. They also provide care for other chronic health conditions like diabetes and high blood pressure disparately impacting minorities. Generous financial support from individuals, businesses and charitable foundations allows Legacy to provide no-cost or low-cost healthcare services to over 30,000 men, women and children each year. The Good Neighbor Healthcare Center also in my Congressional district offers a wide array of services to families living in the greater Houston area. Services include primary health care, dental care, optometry, and behavioral health services. Good Neighbor Healthcare Center has a special mission to the community that goes right to the heart of providing quality, accessible primary health care and dental care to those in need. Good Neighbor Healthcare Center serves patients from virtually every zip code in Harris County, and the diverse staff is ready to assist patients with all of their health care needs. Good Neighbor Healthcare Center assists patients in Spanish or English as needed as well. Community health centers are an integral part of our communities providing a source of local employment and economic growth in many underserved and low-income communities. In 2009, community health centers across the Nation provided more than $11 billion in operating expenditures directly into their local economies. Community health centers employ more than 9,100 physicians and more than 5,700 nurse practitioners, physician assistants, and certified nurse midwives to treat patients through culturally competent, quality and integrated care. And lastly, I offered an amendment that would be essential to an unprecedented opportunity to serve more patients, retain existing and support new jobs, meet the significant increase in demand for primary health care services among the nation's uninsured and underserved populations and address essential construction, renovation, and equipment and health information technology systems needs in community health centers. I cannot turn my back and shut the door on the constituents I represent in securing accessible, affordable and quality healthcare services in my Congressional district. If the Healthcare Repeal Bill were to pass, this amendment would ensure that insurance rates do not increase from those rates that would have applied if the law is left intact. Health care reform is something that people have fought for fervently for years, and it would be a great disservice to the American people if the health care law were repealed as a result of politics. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act insure access to quality, affordable healthcare for all Americans. It also makes necessary changes that will make our system of health care more efficient. Children are allowed to stay on their parents' health insurance until the age of twenty-six. Patients cannot be refused health insurance coverage because of pre- existing conditions. Insurance premiums were lowered and mechanisms are in place to avoid them getting any higher. Repealing health care reform would reverse all of this good that has been done. However, if the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is repealed, it is important that certain provisions of the law remain intact. For aforementioned reasons, I urge my colleagues to reason with the American people and provide an opportunity for every American in every state to receive affordable and quality healthcare. If the Healthcare Law is repealed without the inclusion of my amendment, that would ensure that insurance rates do not increase from those rates that would have applied if the law is left intact, we are left great potential for health insurance rates to rise, much like they did in the past, to levels which make coverage inaccessible and unaffordable for many Americans. Before the Healthcare Reform Bill was signed into law, increasing healthcare costs were crushing the budgets of families and American businesses, making us less competitive in the ever growing global market, placing Medicare and Medicaid in serious danger, damaging our long-term fiscal stability, and worse of all, causing Americans to continue to go without basic health care coverage. This broken health care system was driving up health care costs and weakening our economy. Minorities in general were more in danger of being uninsured and falling victim to frequent emergency visits, increasing debt that leads to bankruptcy, and premature death. Without healthcare reform, a devastating number of citizens would have had to continue to live without healthcare. No American citizen should have to face a decision of whether to buy food or pay healthcare premiums. Putting a face to healthcare is recognizing Iris Williams from Houston, Texas. For many mothers, finding a good doctor for their children can be quite difficult, especially if they don't have health insurance. When the child has fears of going to the doctor, the difficulty only worsens. Iris Williams first brought her son, Simon, to Legacy Community Health Services in 2007. As a resident in the surrounding area, Iris liked the convenience of Legacy's Community Health Center on Lyons Avenue in the heart of her neighborhood. When she found out Legacy offered school physicals, even to those without health insurance, she was thrilled. ``My son had a bad experience with a doctor when he was younger and did not like going to the doctor,'' Iris sighed. ``But Legacy was able to schedule a physical for Simon within the week, and I was told it would only cost $45.'' Now that Iris had an appointment for her son at an affordable cost, she only had to worry about whether Simon would like the doctor. ``I just love Dr. Levine, he is so kind and wonderful,'' Iris continued, ``he not only made my son feel at ease but he also treated him like a young man. That made us both feel really good.'' This past summer Simon hurt his finger at a summer program. Iris had to take him to the emergency room to get his fingernail removed. For his follow-up care Iris sought out Legacy to clean the wound and make sure it was healing properly. ``Again the staff at Legacy was great and the finger is healing nicely,'' Iris glowed. ``I am so glad Legacy had a doctor to care for him after the visit to the ER.'' When people in Iris's neighborhood ask her where to go for quality and affordable healthcare, Iris doesn't hesitate to refer them to Legacy. She knows they will get great care. Iris stated, ``it gives me great satisfaction knowing that Legacy is here for all of us and will take care of our health care needs.'' Madam Speaker, what do you expect I say to constituents similar to Iris Williams? Madam Speaker, before the Healthcare Reform Bill passed, the need for more efficient healthcare was dire, especially within my home State of Texas. One in four Texans, about 5.7 million people, or 24.5 percent of the State's population, had no health insurance coverage. An estimated 1,339,550 Texas children--20.2 percent of Texas children--were uninsured. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, Texas had the Nation's highest percentage of uninsured residents. This posed consequences for every person, business, and local government in the State who were forced to bear extra costs to pay for uncompensated care. If the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is repealed, Texas, like many other States, runs the risk of a reoccurrence of statistics such as these. Over the years, I have had the opportunity to meet with health care providers who have been on the front lines of health care debates from day one. It is no surprise that they enthusiastically endorsed healthcare reform, and many are still holding out hope for progressive changes to the current healthcare laws as we move forward in this new Congress. These health professionals have seen the pain and frustration of hardworking Americans who faced financial collapse, physical suffering, and sometimes the loss of their life simply because they did not have decent health care coverage. The repeal of healthcare reform could lead our Nation back down a similar path, and I am confident that no health care professionals, nor I, or any of my colleagues would want to see situations like that reoccur. The late Congresswoman Barbara Jordan, who once held the seat that I so proudly and humbly hold today said, ``What the people want is very simple. They want an America as good as its promise.'' These words resonate in our time and the American people only ask for simple things. Therefore, I and my fellow colleagues are striving to maintain something we fought for tirelessly for years and were finally able to secure in the last Congress--the ability to provide all Americans with affordable and accessible healthcare. For these reasons, I urge my colleagues to allow their conscious to recognize the greater need to work across the aisles with one another and strengthen our healthcare system to one day provide universal healthcare for all Americans. Again, I am in opposition of H.R. 2.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Thank you so very much. Maybe they would not be able to withstand this onslaught on their rights because the Constitution guarantees them equal protection. And some who have insurance and some who do not would not be treated equally. And finally, let me say that in Texas, the Department of Insurance has said that this bill helps Texans. I hope my colleague from Texas will vote not to repeal this bill. I will vote ``no'' on the repeal. Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. There is nothing that one can do when you're debating this bill than to be civil and to respect the American people, who, many of them, are in the jaws of terrible disease, rehabilitation, or maybe some have already lost their lives. And the repeal of this health bill, just a couple of pages, would sentence people possibly to dying. H.R. 2 talks about jobs when we're talking about lives. So I think it is important that we follow what the repeal of this patient protection and health care bill does--end consumer protection, patient protection. And I think it is important for us to be able to hold this Constitution and prove that the Affordable Care Act is constitutional. Well, I could say that there are 1.1 million jobs already created, that the deficit will blow up $143 billion, a trillion over 20 years. But I really want to refer to the 14th Amendment that allows and guarantees you equal protection under the law. If this bill is repealed, Ed Burke, a hemophiliac, will probably have serious health issues because he would have lifetime caps. Or Mr. Land, who was on my health care teleconference--where 18,000 people in Harris County were contacted--maybe he, who is from a family of schizophrenics and people who have children that have schizophrenia, maybe he would not be guaranteed the equal protection under the law.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Congresswoman Giffords loved America and she loved America's values, and America blessed her with opportunities. American values give us all the opportunity to do our best and to be our best. Last Saturday, Congresswoman Giffords was at her best meeting the people of Arizona, of Tucson, and the United States of America. But Congresswoman Giffords would also ask us to do our best. And as the Bible has said, she was a woman who used her talents well. She would also want us to acknowledge the Americans who have poured out their hearts during this tragedy all over this Nation. Americans did their best Saturday. And good Americans lost their lives being good Americans. We know of those who lost their lives and offered to us a sacrifice: Christina Taylor Green, Dorothy Morris, Judge John Roll, Phyllis Schneck, Dorwan Stoddard, and Gabriel Zimmerman of her staff. We are well aware of what happened. And we say to Congresswoman Giffords, keep on fighting for your life, along with others who were wounded, while the heroes of that day, Mr. Hernandez and others, reflect on the horror. But hopefully, they know that they did their best. Now it is time for us to do our best, to be a servant leader, giving to others first, showing by example. It is so very important that we do so in her name. To Captain Kelly, a brave American and family, we stand by you, we stand by your side. You will not stand by yourself. To Congresswoman Giffords' staff, we stand with you, and we pray for you and your loss and those who are wounded. We are committed to both our freedom of expression and our job to create a more perfect Union. And yes, in the words of Scott Kelly, as I offer them today, Mark's twin brother, ``We have a unique vantage point here aboard the international space station. As I look out the window, I see a very beautiful planet that seems very inviting and peaceful. Unfortunately, it is not. These days, we are constantly reminded of the unspeakable acts of violence and damage we can inflict upon one another, not just with our actions but also with our irresponsible words. We are better than this. We must do better.'' I agree, we can do better. And we can follow these words.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Nonviolence is a powerful and just weapon which cuts without wounding and ennobles the man who wields it as a sword that heals. Let us use nonviolence in our expression. Let us denounce violence. And as Martin Luther King would tell us, that we can be a people of peace. And I know that we know the words of John Lennon, ``Let it be.'' But the truth will let us be free. And I look forward to the gentlelady from Tucson, Arizona, being here with us. God bless you, and God bless America. I rise today to voice my strongest, sincerest and most heartfelt support for House Resolution 32, ``Expressing the Sense of the House of Representatives with Respect to the Tragic Shooting in Tucson, Arizona, on January 8, 2011.'' This resolution rightly condemns the horrific attack which occurred that fateful Saturday at the ``Congress on Your Corner'' event held by our beloved colleague, Representative Gabrielle Giffords. Representative Giffords was doing something she loved to do; something so fundamentally important to which every member of Congress can relate. She and her dedicated staff were truly bringing Congress home to the constituents on ``Main Street'' and making sure that they knew their national government was accessible to them, cared about them, was there to listen to their concerns and to work together with them to make this country a better place, beginning with their own community. It is only fitting, that on the opening day of the 112th Congress, Representative Giffords read from the First Amendment of the Constitution which states that ``Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.'' This devastating tragedy touched the hearts and minds of not only the good people of Tucson, Arizona, but indeed the very hearts and minds of all Americans. At that moment, everyone in America, and in many places throughout the world, collectively identified with the good people of Tucson. We felt their shock, we felt their pain and we shared their anguish over the senseless killing and injury of innocent people who simply gathered at a comfortable, well known local establishment to participate in our great democracy with their friend and Congresswoman, Gabrielle Giffords. We mourn the needless loss of life and condemn this atrocious infliction of pain, injury and suffering. We pray for the swift healing of all wounds, both physical and spiritual, for those who suffered from this tragedy. We pay tribute to the value and sanctity of every life, and we count our blessings. Among those blessings, I am privileged to count the time I spent serving alongside Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords in the House of Representatives, and I look forward to serving with her again very soon. She embodies the kind of goodness, selflessness, caring and passion for helping others that make her constituents in Tucson and throughout the state of Arizona justly proud. Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords loves her district, the state of Arizona, and loves our great country. She loves America's values and America blessed her with opportunities. America's values give us all the opportunity to do our best and to be our best, and Congresswoman Giffords did just that, making the most of her talents. Congresswoman Giffords was at her best last Saturday meeting with the people. She is truly a ``servant-leader'' like all of us, in this august legislative body. Congresswoman Giffords would also ask us to do our best and to acknowledge the Americans who poured their hearts out during this tragedy. Americans in Tucson and across the country did their best to respond to this tragedy last Saturday, and many good Americans lost their lives being heroic Americans. I pay tribute to the six individuals who lost their lives on Saturday, January 8, 2011, at the ``Congress on Your Corner'' event in Tucson, Arizona. The assassin's bullets did not discriminate; they took the lives of young and old alike. We mourn the loss of Gabriel Zimmerman, the Community Outreach Director who shared Representative Gifford's passion for personally connecting with constituents at the local level to improve the quality of their lives and to simply be a good friend and neighbor. We mourn the loss of nine-year-old Christina Taylor Green, who lost her life on that tragic day. She serves as an example for us all. She had just been elected to her school student council, and she attended the ``Congress on Your Corner'' event with great interest. At the tender age of 9, she was already a leader with a promising future. We also pay our most sincere tribute to and mourn Federal Judge John Roll, Dorothy Morris, Phyllis Schneck and Dorwan Stoddard, who also needlessly lost their lives that day while exercising their right to peaceably assemble and participate in our democracy. Furthermore, I pay tribute to the many heroes of all ages who demonstrated the most unselfish bravery and came to the aid of all those in attendance at the ``Congress on Your Corner'' event. Among those, we admire the 61 year old Patricia Maisch, who bravely risked the loss of her own life and effectively disarmed the shooter as several men pounced on him and threw him to ground. As they struggled to hold him down, Maisch joined the group of people wrestling on the ground, clinging to the gunman's ankles, and she grabbed the gunman's bullet clip before he could reload and continue his savage attack. Patricia Maisch humbly said, ``I am not a hero. The other guys are. I just assisted getting the clip.'' Congresswoman Giffords is also close to her family and married to Captain Mark Kelly, who honors this great nation with his service as a NASA Astronaut at the Johnson Space Center in Houston. This tragic event occurred on the eve of Mark Kelly's planned command of the last shuttle mission to the Space Station. His twin brother, Captain Scott Kelly, also honors this nation with his service as a NASA Astronaut. Space station Commander Scott Kelly led NASA in a moment of silence Monday January 11, 2011, as he struggled with the senseless shooting of his sister-in-law, Gabrielle Giffords. He was in outer space at the time of the shooting. Flight controllers in Houston fell silent as Scott Kelly spoke via radio from space. ``We have a unique vantage point here aboard the International Space Station,'' he said. ``As I look out the window, I see a very beautiful planet that seems very inviting and peaceful. Unfortunately, it is not. These days, we are constantly reminded of the unspeakable acts of violence and damage we can inflict upon one another, not just with our actions, but also with our irresponsible words. We're better than this. We must do better.'' Congresswoman Giffords is now fighting for her life along with others who were wounded on that fateful day while the heroes of that day reflect on the horrible tragedy that occurred and hopefully, remaining cognizant that they did their best in the most trying of circumstances. Now it is time for us to do our best, to be servant-leaders giving to others first and leading by example. To Captain Kelly and his family, we stand by your side; you do not stand alone. To Congresswoman Giffords' staff, we stand with you too and extend our heartfelt condolences on the loss of your fellow staff member, Gabriel Zimmerman, and our prayers for your wounded fellow staff members. We are committed to both our freedom of expression and our Constitution's constant pursuit to create a more perfect union. We as a nation are better than what occurred in Tucson on Saturday, and we are showing it today and must continue to show it every day henceforth. As we approach the holiday commemorating the life of slain civil rights leader, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., I am reminded of his commitment to nonviolence. Dr. King's timeless words ring especially true at this time. He reminds us that ``Nonviolence is a powerful and just weapon, which cuts without wounding and ennobles the man who wields it. It is a sword that heals.'' In the wake of this shocking event and at this crucial moment in our nation's history, I call for a commitment from all of my colleagues in the United States Congress to act and speak with a renewed and inspired sense of civility and respect for one another in our discourse. I call for a restoration of the time honored history and tradition of this great legislative chamber, which includes an atmosphere of decorum, comity, collegiality, and respect, even while we discuss the most hotly debated issues of our day. We have before us a great opportunity to lead by example and remind the people of this nation and throughout the world about what makes our democracy truly unique and special. We need only recall that we are here as the duly elected Members of Congress to represent the people of our districts, our states and this country. We can demonstrate we truly reflect the voices of the people who sent us here. As we go about conducting the nation's business, we can comport ourselves with respect and dignity toward one another even when we disagree. A nation is watching. What we do at this critical time is of great importance. We have the rare opportunity to honor those tragic victims of January 8, 2011, by setting a new national tone of civility. Then, our constituents will know that we truly speak for them. I urge my colleagues to join me in this commitment.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I am wondering whether many people understand what we did today. Frankly, we gave permission for more Americans to die from a lack of good health care. In fact, as I presented my amendments to the Rules Committee last evening, I was reminded, if you will, of those who really suffer because of a lack of access to good health care. I offered an amendment to ensure that H.R. 2, to repeal this good health care bill, would not eliminate what we call community health clinics and deny rural and urban areas of good doctors and nurses who treat the children and seniors. And then I asked that we protect the middle class and not have the insurance rates go up. And finally, an amendment to make sure that we don't have Medicaid and Medicare fraud and abuse and to protect those who need Medicaid, as my State of Texas is going to eliminate it. So people will die as we proceed in this untimely and ludicrous process. But I'm glad that Pastor D.Z. Cofield in my district will ascend to the presidency of the NAACP in our local community. I believe with all of these good thinking people, we will be able to rise up and save the lives and oppose any repeal of this good affordable care bill.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Section 6: ``The Senators and Representatives shall receive a compensation for their services to be ascertained by law and paid out of the Treasury of the United States. They shall in all cases, except treason, felony and breach of the peace, be privileged from arrest during their attendance at the session of their respective Houses and in going to and returning from the same; and for any speech or debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other place.''

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, today was a glorious day, but as we begin to discuss the rules that are now taking place, I raise questions. I would like to understand, if we are going to go forward in a fiscally responsible way, and I have heard so much about the Tea Party and I welcome certainly the expressions of those who have been elected as Republicans of those views, but we stand in this House, Republican and Democrat and some Independent, to work on issues for the American people. How do you in fact then eliminate, in some sense, the pay-as-you-go rule, which we have all been committed to, which allows us to pay for what we want to encourage the American people to have. But now we have a rule that says that you cannot raise revenue. So if your soldiers on the battlefield need more resources, you can only get it by cutting spending of some other vulnerable population. What sense does that make? When we speak of open rules, what sense does it make to have a rule tomorrow that indicates that we're repealing the health care bill under a closed rule, where we'll be saving some $143 billion over 3 years, but that rule would not allow that. This is a rules package that needs fixing, and I hope that we can go back to the drawing board.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, my colleagues are absolutely right. This has been the most astute and conscientious Congress in the history of our Nation, the 111th Congress, led by the very astute and courageous Nancy Pelosi, the historic first woman Speaker. I thank her and the leadership. Thank you for health care and Wall Street reform. Thank you for the reform of the GI Bill, to provide more opportunity. And, as well, thank you for moving and pushing compassionately the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell. The White House ceremony today was powerful. Thank you again for recognizing that the 9/11 heroes health bill must be taken care of. I ask the other body to act now and do not go home without doing so. But yet the omnibus bill that will help so many millions of Americans with resources directed to them has been imploded, and I call upon the Senate, I call upon this House when we return, to be able to return America's resources back to them. We negotiated that omnibus. It is time to make sure that those veterans and those who need PTSD recovery and those who need health care are provided for through this omnibus bill. Happy holiday, Merry Christmas and Happy New Year.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of the S. 372, the ``Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act of 2010.'' S. 372 amends the Whistleblower Protection Act (WPA) and strengthens the rights and protections of Federal employees who come forward to disclose government waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanagement. The House has passed similar legislation on a bipartisan basis in 2007 (H.R. 985) and 2009, as an amendment to the Recovery Act. I am a staunch advocate for protecting Federal employees from retaliation when they come forward to disclose waste, fraud, abuse and mismanagement. Whistleblowers are among the most patriotic and conscientious Federal employees. They take great risks to make certain that our Federal Government is functioning properly and effectively for all taxpayers. They serve as indispensable guardians for the efficient use of taxpayer funds. This is an especially valuable service during this vital period of national economic recovery. Unhindered exposure of waste, fraud and abuse identifies expensive break-downs in the functioning of our Federal Government while also preserving the Federal funds we require to effectively serve our citizens. In some instances, conscientious whistleblowers protect others from harm and actually save lives. So, we must protect these attentive Federal employees who expose systemic lapses and protect the integrity and proper functioning of our Federal Government. Discrimination and retaliation against Federal employees contravenes Federal law, puts the public at risk, and costs taxpayers millions of dollars. Retaliation and discrimination also breed a myriad of other costs that cannot be quantified in the toll exacted on the health, morale, and well-being of Federal employees who are entrusted to protect and serve our Nation. Federal managers and supervisors who engage in discriminatory conduct must be judiciously and expeditiously disciplined. S. 372, the ``Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act of 2010'' enhances the protection of Federal employees. It restores Congress' intent to protect an employee who makes any lawful disclosure of waste, fraud, abuse, or illegality. S. 372 addresses court decisions that have limited the protections Congress made available to Federal employees under the 1989 Whistleblower Protection Act. This legislation will improve the administration of justice. It will allow non-intelligence whistleblowers to bring their cases before a jury under certain circumstances. The current administrative system will be further strengthened by allowing a limited number of more complex whistleblower cases to be considered in Federal court by juries. The bill also will allow whistleblower appeals to be heard by the regional Federal appellate courts. This bill further expands upon the protections for Federal employees in additional necessary and meaningful ways. It extends whistleblower protections to employees at the Transportation Security Administration. It clarifies that whistleblowers may disclose evidence of censorship of scientific or technical information under the same standards that apply to disclosures of other kinds of waste, fraud, and abuse. It enhances protections for employees facing retaliation after refusing to violate the law or participating in an Inspector General investigation. This legislation will codify and strengthen rules that preempt agencies from issuing regulations or directives that interfere with whistleblower protections. I am also pleased to say, that for the first time, S. 327 will make compensatory damage awards available to whistleblowers. This is a key component in ensuring a whistleblower is made whole after suffering retaliation. This bill will also make it easier for the Office of Special Counsel to discipline agency managers who are found to retaliate against employees. It is my fervent expectation that this legislation will meaningfully advance our national integrity by deterring Federal managers from violating the civil rights and civil liberties of their fellow Federal workers, especially whistleblowers. I ask my colleagues to stand with me today and vote in favor of S. 327. The bill was ordered to be read a third time, was read the third time, and passed, and a motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. I thank the distinguished gentleman, and I rise to support the Senate amendment to H.R. 847, to be able to thank Carolyn Maloney for the enormous work and to also cite those who I saw dying that they might live. Madam Speaker I rise today in strong support of H.R. 847, the ``James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act.'' This bill has been a long time coming, and I am glad that it is finally here for us to provide medical monitoring and treatment benefits to eligible emergency responders and recovery and cleanup workers who responded to the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. This legislation also allows for initial health evaluation, monitoring, and treatment benefits to residents and other building occupants and area workers in New York City who were directly impacted and adversely affected by the 9/11 terrorist attacks. I have met firsthand many of these first responders and workers, and I know the patriotic sacrifices they have made for their fellow Americans. These brave, selfless individuals who put aside their own needs and fears to come to the aid of their fellow Americans put their lives at risk. They ventured into the wreckage and dust of the World Trade Center, not worrying about their own well being, but rather, hoping that they could save the lives of strangers. As a result of their fearless acts, many of these emergency workers and first responders were exposed to airborne toxins and other hazards. Providing medical services, including clinical examinations, long-term health monitoring, mental health care and necessary prescription drug coverage, is the least we can do to repay them for their efforts. The James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act will provide both initial and follow-up medical services for World Trade Center responders and workers whose physical and mental health were impacted by the 9/11 attacks. H.R. 847 will also establish an outreach program to potentially eligible individuals. September 11, 2001, is a day that is indelibly etched in the psyche of every American and most of the world. Much like the unprovoked attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, September 11 is a day that will live in infamy. And as much as Pearl Harbor changed the course of world history by precipitating the global struggle between totalitarian fascism and representative democracy, the transformative impact of September 11 in the course of American and human history is indelible. September 11 was not only the beginning of the Global War on Terror, but moreover, it was the day of innocence lost for a new generation of Americans. Just like my fellow Americans, I remember September 11 as vividly as if it was yesterday. In my mind's eye, I can still remember being mesmerized by the television as the two airliners crashed into the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center, and I remember the sense of terror we experienced when we realized that this was no accident, that we had been attacked, and that the world as we know it had changed forever. The moment in which the Twin Towers collapsed and the nearly 3,000 innocent Americans died haunts me until this day. At this moment, I decided that the protection of our homeland would be at the forefront of my legislative agenda. I knew that all of our collective efforts as Americans would all be in vain if we did not achieve our most important priority: the security of our nation. Accordingly, I became then and continue to this day to be an active and engaged Member of the Committee on Homeland Security who considers our national security paramount. Our nation's collective response to the tragedy of September 11 exemplified what has been true of the American people since the inception of our Republic--in times of crisis, we come together and always persevere. Despite the depths of our anguish on the preceding day, on September 12, the American people demonstrated their compassion and solidarity for one another as we began the process of response, recovery, and rebuilding. We transcended our differences and came together to honor the sacrifices and losses sustained by the countless victims of September 11. Let us honor those who served and sacrificed by passing H.R. 847. Madam Speaker, as I stand here today, my heart still grieves for those who perished on flights United Airlines 93, American Airlines 77, American Airlines 11, and United Airlines 175. When the sun rose on the morning of September 11, none of us knew that it would end in an inferno in the magnificent World Trade Center Towers in New York City, the Pentagon in Washington, DC, and in the grassy fields of Shanksville, Pennsylvania. How I wish we could have hugged and kissed and held each of the victims one last time. I stand here remembering those who still suffer, whose hearts still ache over the loss of so many innocent and interrupted lives. My prayer is that for those who lost a father, a mother, a husband, a wife, a child, or a friend will in the days and years ahead take comfort in the certain knowledge that they have gone on to claim the greatest prize, a place in the Lord's loving arms. And down here on the ground, their memory will never die so long as any of the many of us who loved them lives. Again, I would like to reiterate my strong support for H.R. 847, the James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act, for it is important that we take care of those who take care of us in our time of need.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and insert extraneous material on the bill under consideration.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of S. 3243, the Anti-Border Corruption Act of 2010, and yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, we all have a stake in ensuring that the agency in charge of securing our border is strong and effective. Accordingly, I believe that corruption anywhere in the ranks of Customs and Border Protection, or CBP, must be dealt with swiftly and effectively. Now, having gone to our border, both northern and southern border, I am well aware that there is a lot of hard work, sacrifice, and professionalism that goes on among our CBP personnel. In fact, I have engaged with them over the years. S. 3243, however, will foster greater integrity throughout the CBP by requiring polygraph tests for all its law enforcement applicants and directing CBP leadership to conduct periodic reinvestigations on current personnel to root out any corruption--very important in light of the extreme conditions, particularly on the southern border, and the fight that we have against drug cartels and violence. The men and women of Customs and Border Protection, CBP, serve on the front line in extreme heat, terrible cold, and other difficult circumstances to protect the Nation against homeland security and criminal threats, and we are enormously grateful to them. I am proud of the strides that Congress has made over the years to bolster the efforts of these fine men and women by, among other things, doubling the size of the Border Patrol from about 10,000 agents in FY 2002 to more than 20,000 in FY 2009. I am very pleased that having served on that committee since its origin, and having served under Chairman Thompson, that was one of our number one priorities. In fact, legislation that I introduced became, ultimately, part of a Senate bill that helped increase the number of Border Patrol agents at the border, the southern border in particular. Traditional smuggling routes and networks have been disrupted because of our Federal efforts to secure the border. But in response, smugglers and other criminal organizations are actively seeking out other ways to conduct their illegal activity. They have, in some cases, resorted to infiltrating and weakening CBP from within its ranks. While the majority of CBP employees are not corrupt and are putting their lives on the line every day to keep America secure, there are some who are undermining their efforts. Let me remind my colleagues: The majority of CBP employees are not corrupt, and we thank them for their sacrifice. However, enactment of this bill will strengthen personnel integrity, result in greater hiring efficiency, and protect those who are doing their job every single day. According to CBP, approximately 15 percent of applicants received a polygraph examination last year. Of those, about 60 percent were found unsuitable for service. CBP has also found that less than 1 percent of applicants cleared by polygraph testing failed the required background investigation. It shows that this process will work. In contrast, roughly 22 percent of applicants who do not undergo this testing fail their background investigations. Maintaining workforce integrity is a continuous process that does not end with preemployment screening. With the aggressive growth in CBP, the agency has struggled to keep up with its periodic reinvestigations of certain personnel. S. 3243 would require CBP to initiate reinvestigation within 6 months of enactment and report to Congress on its progress, all toward the idea of ensuring the integrity of law enforcement at a very crucial time in America's history. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the passage of S. 3243, because this legislation will help bolster CBP's ability to ensure integrity throughout the ranks of this critical Homeland Security agency. And, frankly, I believe the men and women who are doing their job every day will welcome this kind of process in order to be able to stand alongside of those men and women just like them. I urge support. I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (S. 3243) to require U.S. Customs and Border Protection to administer polygraph examinations to all applicants for law enforcement positions with U.S. Customs and Border Protection, to require U.S. Customs and Border Protection to complete all periodic background reinvestigations of certain law enforcement personnel, and for other purposes.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of making further continuing appropriations for fiscal year 2011. This measure will continue to assure funding for all Federal Government agencies and allow the Government to continue its day to day operations through March 4, 2011, provided under Public Law 111-242, the first fiscal year 2011 Continuing Resolution (CR). This Continuing Resolution will basically fund the Government at levels previously approved by the House for fiscal year 2010. It is of great importance that this Congress continues to decide how best to finalize fiscal year 2011 spending and explore ways to equitably decrease the national deficit. As a Member of Congress, it is a critical constitutional responsibility to assure continued funding streams for the Federal Government. This Continuing Resolution will ensure that all necessary and key functions of Government will continue unimpeded until Congress finalizes our work with the passage of final appropriations legislation. There have been a few exceptions, but at least one Continuing Resolution has been enacted for each fiscal year since 1955. As we rapidly approach the holiday season, and the end of the year is only 10 days away, there is no greater business before this chamber than keeping our Federal Government up and running. Especially during this crucial time of transition, the citizens of the United States are depending upon us to keep the Federal Government fully operational. We must provide a sense of certainty and stability as our country continues to recover from recession and remains engaged in two wars abroad. I must say that I am very disturbed that we cannot get our colleagues to cooperate in a bi-partisan manner to pass essential appropriations bills and must instead resort to short-term continuing resolutions. However, with the funding for all Federal agencies and programs set to expire at midnight tonight, it is imperative that we pass this Continuing Resolution. It is crucial that we continue to fund Government agencies and programs without interruption. We must keep this Nation moving forward toward progress. In recent days and months, unnecessary partisan battles in both chambers have been waged over expenditures included in appropriations measures. Partisan finger-pointing and squabbling have hindered the passage of appropriations bills and had a negative impact on our economic recovery. This Continuing Resolution has suffered the same fate. I would like to remind all of my colleagues that appropriations are built-in by law to permit Members of Congress to identify and provide funding for useful and necessary projects in their districts. Specifically, in my home district of Houston, I fought hard to include in the Continuing Resolution, a total of $175,595,558 in appropriations funding for fiscal year 2011. These projects create jobs, rebuild our infrastructure and benefit our districts, our States and our country, as well. Though I recommended funding for critical transportation and infrastructure projects in Houston, Texas, unfortunately this funding was excluded from the Continuing Resolution. Though an opportunity to improve our national economy was lost, I will continue to fight for the funding of such useful, necessary and economically productive projects in Houston and support the funding of these types of projects nationwide. Overall, the Continuing Resolution will generally benefit the citizens of Houston and the entire country by continuing to fund important government programs without interruption. As we move forward, it is my hope that both chambers in the House and Senate will take a bipartisan approach to moving vitally important appropriations legislation which includes useful, necessary, job creating and economy- building projects from our districts. This is the fiscally responsible course and grows and strengthens our economy in the long run. In summation, I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this Continuing Resolution as we continue the work of the Federal Government.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. It is a tragedy that, for example, a group that houses victims of human trafficking will not be able to be responded to, or a group that deals with those who are trying to rebuild their lives as ex-offenders will not get funding and that infrastructure projects will not get funding. Let me remind my colleagues, you don't save money; you just hand it over to the executive and it finds its way in some other direction. I am delighted we stand here today, continue to have the government work, and I appreciate the great work that was done for the CR.