Jim McGovern

Mr. McGOVERN

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, what is before the House today is not a serious legislative effort. It's a series of sound bites that mean nothing. Committees don't have to do anything. Speaker Boehner is quoted in The Hill basically saying that he's not going to hold any of these committees accountable. They can do it if they want to; whatever. If they don't, so be it. What we are dealing with here today really is kind of a political ploy, not a serious legislative effort to replace anything. My friends on the other side of the aisle have gotten up over and over and over again and said, we're really with you on preexisting conditions, we're really with you on the doughnut hole, we're with you on allowing parents to keep their kids on their insurance until they're 26. But yet they're really not. Because if they were, they wouldn't have voted yesterday to repeal all those protections. And if they were really with us, then we would be talking about today coming to the House floor with a series of initiatives that would actually continue to protect those benefits for consumers. But they voted to repeal all of that. I want to know, how could anybody in this House, how could anybody, in light of the protections that have been put in place, go back to an individual who is now able to get health insurance because we prohibited insurance companies from discriminating against them for a preexisting condition, how can you go to them and say, well, we're going to change our mind; we're not going to do that anymore? How do you go to senior citizens who are struggling with that doughnut hole--and we've begun to close it--how do you go to them and say we're going to raise your taxes? How do you do that? How do you go to a parent whose child can remain on their health insurance because we've extended it to allow them to stay on it until they're 26 and say, well, that doesn't matter anymore? It just doesn't make sense. That's not what people voted for in the last election. They didn't vote for you to repeal all of those things. What they voted against was this distortion of a health care bill that you put out there, my friends on the other side of the aisle, that was very well funded by the most expensive advertising campaign funded by the insurance companies in the history of our country, this distortion out there. Everybody was against that distortion. That is not the reality. As the months have gone by and as the reality has become clear to people, as they have seen the benefits and the protections, as people have been able to wrest control of their health care from the insurance industry, as consumers realize they have more and more rights, as there are more and more protections that are built into law to protect people of all ages, people say, well, we don't want you to change that; we want that to be saved. I will just say one thing. When my friends say, well, we can just do a little bit of this and a little bit of that, you really can't, because it's kind of like a domino effect. Everything has an impact. So this is a serious debate. And if there is some indignation on this side of the aisle, it is because we know that this is a big deal, and real people who have real challenges affording their health care and dealing with the complexities of the health care system and the inequities of the health care system are now getting some relief, and they will be hurt by what you are doing. So let's be honest here. What happened yesterday was my friends on the other side of the aisle went on record as saying, We're against everything. Today, we're going to pass a resolution, I guess, that doesn't do anything, doesn't even require committees to do anything, but it's just for all these nice, feel-good sound bites. That's not a serious legislative effort. That's why people are cynical. We can do better. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this.

Mr. McGOVERN. They voted against everything.

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Moran).

Mr. McGOVERN. I yield the gentlewoman an additional 15 seconds.

Mr. McGOVERN. I have further speakers, but there is a time discrepancy; so I will let you catch up.

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, how much time remains?

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Maryland (Ms. Edwards).

Mr. McGOVERN. I yield 10 seconds to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Weiner).

Mr. McGOVERN. Thank you, Madam Speaker, for maintaining decorum in the House. We appreciate it. I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Weiner).

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman for his comments in recognizing the fact that the provision that allows parents to keep their children on their insurance until they are 26 is a good idea. But he voted yesterday, along with all the Republicans, to repeal that, to take that away. And this press release that they're now saying is a bill on the House floor here doesn't even address that issue. So I wish the gentleman would have actually voted with his convictions yesterday and voted against repeal, because what he did, if, in fact, this bill becomes law, will deny parents to be able to keep theirs kids on their insurance until they are 26. I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Wasserman Schultz).

Mr. McGOVERN. May I inquire, Madam Speaker, how much time I have remaining.

Mr. McGOVERN. I yield the gentleman 1 additional minute.

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews). (Mr. ANDREWS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. McGOVERN. I yield myself an additional 15 seconds. They voted to take away the benefit from senior citizens that we put in there to help try to close the doughnut hole in the prescription drug bill. And what do they do in terms of replacing it? They come not with an alternative; they come with a press release. That's not serious legislating. That's politics as usual. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone).

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself 15 seconds. Madam Speaker, I think our objection is not with the idea of having a serious debate on these issues. There are areas where we can come together and hopefully make the bill even better. Our objection is the fact that my friends on the other side voted to repeal everything, voted to allow insurance companies to once again discriminate against people with preexisting conditions.

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself 20 seconds. I just want to respond to the gentleman who just spoke. We hear these distortions over and over and over again. We heard them during the campaign, distortions that were perpetrated by my friends on the other side of the aisle and by their allies in the insurance industry, and that, somehow, what we passed was a bill that wouldn't allow you to keep your own health insurance. That's just wrong. What we passed was a bill that actually provides competition and insures tens of millions more Americans. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Ellison).

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself 4 minutes. Madam Speaker, I rise in very strong opposition to this resolution and very strong opposition to the very closed process in which we are discussing this resolution. Once again, I am deeply disappointed that instead of working to create jobs and strengthen the economy, the new Republican majority continues to focus on reopening old wounds and fighting old battles. The resolution before us today is allegedly the replace component of the Republicans' repeal and replace strategy. I say allegedly, Madam Speaker, because this resolution is not a serious legislative effort. It is a series of talking points. It is a press release. What this resolution does is ask the committees of jurisdiction to hopefully, maybe someday, if they would be so kind, to report legislation to the House that meets certain vague goals. Instead of repeal and replace, this is repeal and relax. Trust the Republicans to do the right thing. No thank you, Madam Speaker. Yesterday, this House voted, without a single hearing or markup, without a single amendment, to eliminate the Affordable Care Act in its entirety. The Members who voted for that bill voted to return to the days when insurance companies could discriminate against people based upon preexisting conditions. They voted to eliminate the ban on annual and lifetime limits on care. They voted to eliminate the ability for young people to stay on their parents' insurance plans up to the age of 26. They voted to reopen the doughnut hole in Medicare. Basically, they voted for a tax increase on senior citizens who need prescription drugs. They voted to eliminate tax credits for small businesses who want to do the right thing and provide health insurance for their workers. All of that, Madam Speaker, would have the force of law. All of that was done with real legislative language. But not the resolution before us today. Instead of real language that would provide real benefits to real Americans, this resolution is simply a collection of empty promises. And the ironic thing is that most of the provisions included in the resolution were actually addressed in the Affordable Care Act. According to this resolution, we should, quote, ``lower health care premiums through increased competition and choice.'' Well, the Affordable Care Act already does that. Of course, many of us argued for a public option, which would have lowered premiums even further with increased competition and choice, but my Republican friends didn't want to have anything to do with that. The resolution before us today says we should ``preserve a patient's ability to keep his or her health plan if he or she likes it.'' Well, the Affordable Care Act already does that. Increase the number of insured Americans? Well, we did that by 30 million people. Protect the doctor-patient relationship? We did that. And so on and so on. On the critical issue of people with preexisting conditions, however, it's interesting to see the language that my Republican friends use in this press release that they call a resolution. They say they support, and I quote, ``provide people with preexisting conditions access to affordable health coverage.'' Well, that sounds nice. But what we did in the Affordable Care Act was to actually ban insurance companies from discriminating against those people. I will be very interested to see how my Republican friends handle that critical issue and how much influence the big insurance lobby has around here now that they're in charge. And the doughnut hole? The resolution is absolutely silent on the doughnut hole. Madam Speaker, health care is of vital importance to every single American. It is a big deal. And to treat health insurance reform as just another opportunity for happy talk and wishful thinking is not the way to do business in the people's House. I urge my colleagues to reject this resolution. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Doggett).

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Moore).

Mr. McGOVERN. I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Garamendi).

Mr. McGOVERN

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I rise to celebrate the life of Ashley Turton. Ashley had an incredible career both in the public and private sectors and was respected by so very many people of every political persuasion. She was a wonderful mother of three children, and her death is especially difficult for those of us on Capitol Hill because we got to know Ashley through her work as Rosa DeLauro's chief of staff. She was part of our family. She was a woman of great skill and a woman of great personality. We also know her husband, Dan Turton, who also worked on the Hill for many years and served as the chief of staff to the House Rules Committee. He currently works for the White House. I attended, along with hundreds and hundreds of others, Ashley's memorial service last Friday here in Washington, DC. Those who eulogized Ashley captured her spirit, her determination, and her great compassion. She was a remarkable woman and will never be forgotten. And our prayers are with Dan and Ashley's family.

Mr. McGOVERN

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to speak here today. As has been said over and over, Gabrielle Giffords is a smart, gifted, and compassionate Member of Congress. It is a privilege to be her colleague and friend. Arizona is privileged to be represented by a person of her caliber. My wife, Lisa, and I pray for her recovery. And our thoughts are with her, her family, her friends, and her community as they come together in the aftermath of this terrible act of violence. I look forward to seeing Gabby back here where she belongs, on this floor, advocating on behalf of her constituents. I served in this House for many years as a congressional aide. And since I've been elected to Congress, I've come to appreciate even more the generous and selfless service of our staffs. So I am especially touched and grieved by the murder of Gabe Zimmerman, who served as Gabby's director of community outreach. For those whose lives were lost--Christina Taylor Green, Dorothy Morris, Judge John Roll, Phyllis Schneck, and Dorwan Stoddard, who was related to one of my own staff, my sympathy, condolences, and prayers are with their families and loved ones. I believe so very strongly that we here in this House, and all of us as Americans, must come together and transform this tragedy into something positive and hopeful. We live in a country that is too polarized. And we live in a country where a culture of violence is all too common. If this horrible act of violence results in all of us becoming more civil to one another, in taking a more careful look at the words and imagery we use when talking to and about one another as we deal with difficult and controversial policy debates, if it results in concrete ways to begin to reverse this culture of violence, then our Nation will triumph over this pain and loss. Today is a time to grieve, to mourn, to express sympathy. But unfortunately, in the aftermath of this tragedy, too many of the old fights resurfaced. The left blamed the right, the right blamed the left, everybody blamed the media, op-eds were written, and bills were introduced. But Madam Speaker, none of that will bring back those who were lost. None of that will put a 9-year-old girl back at the breakfast table where she belongs. Like many of my colleagues, on Monday I participated in a national moment of silence. The best thing about that moment was that for just a minute or two the noise stopped. We paused and we reflected. And I hope that we can do more of that in the months and years ahead.

Mr. McGOVERN

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, the American people made it very clear in the last election that they want us to focus on one thing, jobs. But the new Republican majority has instead chosen to reopen an old ideological battle. I think that's a mistake. But the good news is that the American people will have the opportunity, right at the outset of this new Congress, to see the clear differences between Democrats and Republicans. Democrats believe that insurance companies should be prohibited from discriminating on the basis of pre-existing conditions. Republicans do not. Democrats believe that we should close the doughnut hole and reduce prescription drug prices for our seniors. Republicans do not. Democrats believe that young people should be allowed to remain on their parents' health insurance plan until the age of 26. Republicans do not. Democrats believe we should provide tax breaks to small businesses and subsidies to low-income Americans to help them pay for health insurance for their workers and their families. Republicans do not. And Democrats believe that we need to seriously address the budget deficit. Republicans do not, as the Congressional Budget Office made abundantly clear. The CBO told us yesterday that the bill to repeal health insurance reform would add $230 billion to the deficit over the next 10 years and another $1.2 trillion in the following 10 years. As far as I can tell, this is the most expensive one-page bill in American history: 114 words, that's $2 billion per word. And rather than address those budgetary facts, the new Republican majority has simply decided to ignore them, to cover their ears and pretend that the laws of arithmetic do not apply to them. In their first order of legislative business, the Republicans want to take health insurance reform and toss it in the trash. And how many hearings have they held on the impact of this repeal? Zero. How many mark-ups did they have? Zero. And, most shockingly, how many amendments will they consider in this bill? Zero. The new majority whip, Mr. McCarthy, said after the election last November, and I quote: ``When you look at the Pledge to America that the Republicans have laid out, there is a cultural change in there. There is something that opens up the floor that hasn't been done for quite some time, where bills won't be written in the back room, where the bills have to be laid out for 72 hours, where bills actually have an open rule, where people can bring up amendments on the floor.'' So much for that. And instead of thoughtful, reasoned legislative language that addresses the health care issues, the Republicans' replace part of their repeal-and-replace strategy is just a list of happy-talk sound bites. It's no more than a press release. So again, Madam Speaker, I believe we should be focusing on jobs and the economy. And in the meantime, I urge my colleagues to reject this rule and the underlying, reckless bill.