Frank Pallone

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in support of H.R. 307, the Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness Reauthorization Act of 2013. Unfortunately, last month, before the end of the Congress, we were unable to get this final bill over the finish line, so I am grateful to Chairman Upton and Ranking Member Waxman for agreeing to move quickly to get this bill passed and sent over to the Senate without further delay. This bill is virtually identical to the House-passed bill last December. It reflects bipartisan work that took place between the House and Senate over several months late last year to resolve differences between the House- and Senate-passed PAHPRA reauthorization bills. We all know very well that our Nation continues to face threats that require an ongoing commitment to public health and emergency preparedness. Of course, I think to my own district and State of New Jersey after we experienced a devastating storm that destroyed entire communities. The Federal Government's support, including through programs authorized by PAHPRA, was critical in the wake of this hurricane disaster. The legislation before us today reauthorizes programs and activities first established as part of the Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act of 2002, the 2004 Project BioShield Act, and the 2006 Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness Act. Over the past decade, these programs have represented comprehensive efforts to prepare for and respond to public health emergencies. As a result of the investments that followed, our Nation is better equipped to respond to public health emergencies. I just want to take a few moments to highlight ways that H.R. 307 will continue the progress we've made over the past decade: First, the bill further facilitates the development of medical countermeasures through emphasizing medical countermeasure advancement in the National Health Security Strategy, requiring the development of a 5-year budget analysis of the countermeasure enterprise, and calling for the development of a countermeasure strategy and implementation plan; Second, it bolsters the Nation's medical and public health preparedness and response infrastructure, including through a new authority that would allow States to deploy personnel funded through Federal programs to the areas within their State where they are most needed in the aftermath of a disaster; Third, it strengthens and clarifies the position of Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response as the lead for HHS on emergency preparedness and response and calls for streamlining and better coordinating HHS preparedness grants with those of other Departments; Finally, it places even greater emphasis on the special needs of pediatric and other at-risk populations in preparing for and responding to public health emergencies. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 307 improves FDA's emergency response capabilities. It will enable FDA to authorize the distribution and use of medical countermeasures in preparation for an emergency and to take actions during an emergency that will allow for the most effective use of medical countermeasures. I just wanted to thank the Congressmen. First, I want to thank my colleague, who is about to speak, Congresswoman Anna Eshoo, for all her work on this legislation over the years; also, obviously, Mike Rogers and Congressman Gene Green. These are different people who have authored the legislation over the years. I would also like to recognize the contributions of Chairman Upton, Chairman Pitts, Ranking Member Waxman, and Congressman Markey in strengthening the legislation as it moved through the committee process and in discussions with the Senate. They have all worked in a bipartisan fashion over the past 1\1/2\ years to accomplish the goals of our Members, and they should be commended for their work. I urge Members to join me in supporting passage of H.R. 307. I am hopeful that our Senate colleagues will move forward on this bill's passage so we can get it to the President's desk as quickly as possible. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Today marks the 40th anniversary of Roe v. Wade. Ultimately decisions about whether to choose adoption, end a pregnancy, or raise a child must be left to a woman, her family, and her faith, with the counsel of her doctor or health care provider. Roe v. Wade prevents politicians from interfering with a woman's personal decision. Were Roe ever to be overturned, it could have ripple effects. Our laws and traditions afford constitutional protections to personal decisions relating to, among other things, marriage, procreation, contraception, family relationships, child-rearing, and intimacy. The right to privacy, strengthened by Roe, supports each of these areas. Overturning Roe could thus potentially erode the ability of individuals to make highly personal decisions free from intrusive government regulations and harm the overall right to privacy.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Mr. Steven Goldstein as he embarks on a new venture in life. Mr. Goldstein has worked tirelessly on behalf of the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) community in New Jersey and it is my honor to celebrate him at Garden State Equality's Inauguration Brunch. Steven Goldstein founded Garden State Equality in 2004 and has since led it as CEO and Chair. During his tenure, Garden State Equality has seen 213 LGBT civil rights laws enacted in N.J. A proponent of equal rights for all, Garden State Equality, under Mr. Goldstein's leadership, also advocated for anti-bullying laws and created programs aimed at helping N.J.'s youth. As Mr. Goldstein passes on the torch as CEO and Chair of Garden State Equality to pursue a new career as Associate Chancellor for External Affairs at Rutgers University-- Newark, he remains committed to the organization and its cause and will serve as its Honorary Chair on the Board and executive committee. Mr. Goldstein earned a B.A. from Brandeis University, an M.P.P. from Harvard's John F. Kennedy School of Government, an M.S. from the Columbia School of Journalism and a J.D. from Columbia Law School. In addition to his time at Garden State Equality, Mr. Goldstein's resume includes working as a senior staff member in the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate, a co-campaign manager of a U.S. Senate campaign in N.J., a television producer and an educator. He also endeavors to become a rabbi and is working toward that goal. Mr. Speaker, once again, please join me in thanking Steven Goldstein for his years of service to Garden State Equality and his immeasurable contributions to the State of New Jersey. Mr. Goldstein's leadership and ongoing accomplishments are truly deserving of this body's recognition.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I want to respond to my Republican colleague who just spoke. I respect him tremendously, but I want him and everyone to understand that this really is emergency relief that we're talking about, and I want to give you some examples from my district. For example, he talked about the Community Development Block Grant. I have a town like Sea Bright, New Jersey, where only two businesses in the business district right now are operating. The problem is that, oftentimes, their flood insurance doesn't cover the damage, and even the money coming from FEMA, which is probably only for some type of loan fund, doesn't cover it. So the Community Development Block Grant in Sea Bright will be used to help those businesses come back. It will be grants to the businesses and grants to the homeowners so that they can rebuild. The same is true of the Army Corps of Engineers projects. We need the Rogers amendment. We also need the Frelinghuysen amendment because the Frelinghuysen amendment has all of the Army Corps projects as well as those of the Community Development Block Grant. Those Army Corps projects basically let us put back the beaches, put back the dunes, put back the flood control devices so that we don't have another storm in the future, which could happen at any moment, that would destroy the towns again and wreck even more of our businesses or our homes. Also, the money that's in the $17 million initially is the public assistance money that allows us to rebuild our boardwalks, bring back our tourism. We can't delay any longer because, if we don't get our tourism industry back in place--our businesses, our homes, our boardwalks, our infrastructure back in place--by Memorial Day, then the jobs and the economy that are linked to tourism will be gone. We need this entire package.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to adopt the entire package today for Sandy relief. My district was devastated by the hurricane. We really are in need of this funding in order to rebuild, and we shouldn't have to delay anymore. It's, I think, into the 10th week now since the storm occurred. Really, without this package passing today and then immediately going to the Senate to be passed there as well and signed by the President, the whole effort to try to rebuild the shore in time for the summer season--the jobs, the tourism, the economy related to that--would really be seriously jeopardized. I would urge that my colleagues adopt not only the initial base bill, the Rogers' amendment, but also the Frelinghuysen amendment. The Frelinghuysen amendment, which is the additional $33 billion, will let us basically do a lot of the shore protection, the beach replenishment, the dunes, the flood controls, to prevent damage from a future storm, and also provide the Community Development Block Grants, the grants that there's a lot of flexibility for the towns so they can go back and basically give grants to homeowners as well as small business. Mr. Speaker, I have towns that are devastated. We need this bill now.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in commemoration of the life of Mr. Gordon Prout. Mr. Prout, a resident of Tinton Falls, New Jersey, passed away on December 17, 2012 after decades of public service as a civil engineer for the New Jersey Department of Transportation. Prior to his 34 years of public service, Mr. Prout served his country honorably in the U.S. Army Air Corps during World War II. He was a navigator on a B-17 Flying Fortress for nine missions over Europe before being shot down and captured. Consequently, he spent 16 months as a prisoner in Stalag Luft I in Germany. Mr. Prout successfully returned home on the Queen Mary after being liberated by the Soviets in May, 1945. Mr. Prout is survived by his devoted wife of 67 years, Anne Bruno Prout; a daughter and son-in-law, Judith and Mickey McCabe of Monmouth Beach and Bayonne; a son and daughter-in-law, Donald and Deborah Prout of VA; four grandchildren, Allison McCabe Matto and her husband Joseph, Michael McCabe and his wife Tina, Derek Prout and his wife Jessica and Bryan Prout and his fiancee Tayler Lyttle; and five great- grandchildren, Madelyn, Luke, Grace, Aiden and Abigail. Mr. Speaker, I sincerely hope that my colleagues will join me in honoring Mr. Prout for his lifetime of public service to the state of New Jersey, and his dedicated service to our country.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Madam Speaker, I want to thank my colleague from New York. Madam Speaker, this action by the House Republican leadership is too little and too late. I have to say I'm still very upset--and I think it was deplorable--that the Speaker did not bring this bill up and the whole package that addresses Hurricane Sandy relief in the lame-duck session in the last 2 days of Congress. It would have been passed; we had the votes. It would have been on the President's desk; he would have signed it; and we would have started to rebuild the shore. Now we have another delay. I don't know how many weeks--it's 9 weeks, 10 weeks, whatever it is. I have no idea what the Senate is going to do. My understanding is that the Senate is mired in filibuster over the next 3 weeks and isn't even coming back until after the inauguration. So that means we could be waiting another 3 weeks. The rest of the package--which is the most important part of it--might not even come up until we return after a week's break. We're going to be on recess, and then we come back on the 15th and--hopefully--the rest of the package comes out that day. But that means now that we have three separate votes on this package that could have been passed and signed into law over the last couple of days--three separate votes. It is not acceptable, Madam Speaker.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Let me thank Mr. King, my colleague from New York, for his remarks. I really appreciate what he said--that this is not a Republican or Democratic issue. It shouldn't be politicized. Natural disasters and responding to them are what I've seen over my 25 years in Congress, and they are what bring us together to try to help people. The Speaker should not use this opportunity to tear us apart. I was here last night when we got the word through Congressman King that the Speaker was going to pull this bill. And what the message said was, Well, we can do this in January. We'll do it sometime later in January in the new Congress. As Congressman King said, we can't wait. My district was devastated by this storm. I would ask of Speaker Boehner, come to Sea Bright, New Jersey. Drive through Sea Bright, New Jersey. It's a town that has less than 2,000 people. The business district is totally destroyed. One or two stores have reopened; the rest are still closed. Most of the people still have not been able to return to the town. Go to Union Beach in New Jersey, also in my district, where you can see that now everything is exposed. We still have people that do not have a place to stay, that are looking for an apartment or staying in motels or looking for a trailer to be placed next to their home and still don't have it. We need to rebuild now. We need to act now. We can't wait for the next Congress or another couple of weeks or another couple of months. What I don't understand, Mr. Speaker, is how is it possible that this has become a political issue? It is clear that we're here today. We can vote on this. The votes are clearly there. We should have an open debate. That's what democracy is all about. And all of a sudden, because the Tea Party or some conservative element is worried that they have to vote on another spending bill, all of a sudden the Speaker says, well, we can't do this today. This is politicizing a situation that should not be political. It is another example of what I call the ``do-nothing'' Congress. This Congress did very little. It had fewer bills passed than in anybody's memory. Rather than go out on this negative note about not bringing up an emergency because of a hurricane, a devastating natural disaster, why not do something positive on a bipartisan basis, Mr. Speaker. Bring this up. Let us have an open debate. We're still here. Don't let this Congress die on this negative note. Let it build on a positive note, so when we come in and we're sworn in on Thursday, we can show that we can work on a bipartisan basis. I have never seen anything like it. To me, it is just deplorable.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, let me lend my voice to those who previously spoke, particularly Mr. Hoyer. My district was devastated by the storm. I have thousands of people who do not have homes, who are living in temporary circumstances. I have municipalities that have expended millions of dollars in trying to do the cleanup. The fact of the matter is that if we don't take action tonight and we let this House adjourn without taking action on the supplemental for the hurricane, we will suffer a great deal. Many of these towns are waiting for the money to come through to provide funding for municipal services, for emergency services. Many of them are completely broke at this time in terms of their ability to provide help for their residents. This is a very serious matter. This need is immediate. This can't wait until next week or next month. There's absolutely no way that that can happen without having a tremendous negative impact on the residents of my district. So I implore the Speaker, please reconsider this decision. It is just not possible for us to continue without having some relief from the Federal Government.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Madam Speaker, if we fail to act on the remaining day of the 112th Congress, this Congress will be remembered as one which ignored the will of the people. If we fail to act, a typical middle class family of four would see its taxes rise by $2,200 starting in 2013. This means less money to buy groceries, gas and pay the bills. According to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, going over the cliff would raise the unemployment rate from 7.9 percent to 9.1 percent in 2013. Losing that many jobs would plunge our Nation back into a recession and put an economic recovery even further out of reach. We would be putting jobs on the altar for tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans who have already seen their tax rate plummet to historic lows. It's time that we put an end to the era of trying to balance budgets on the backs of the middle class, and it's time that we take steps to avoid setting our economic recovery up for failure. We all want a better resolution than simply jumping off the fiscal cliff.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. I thank my colleague from Maryland. Mr. Speaker, Republicans are, once again, trying to undermine the recovery of the American middle class. House Republicans have rejected a balanced approach to addressing our deficits and, instead, have opted for draconian cuts to the people who can afford them the least in an effort to protect the wealthy. The Republican plan may as well be called the ``reverse Robin Hood agenda,'' by which they take from the poor to give to the rich: It starts by literally taking food out of the mouths of children by cutting the critical Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, SNAP; Next, they move on to one of their favorite pastimes--trying to repeal the Affordable Care Act, specifically the provisions that help make health care more affordable for women, children, seniors, and the poor; 300,000 low-income children will lose access to health care thanks to cuts to Medicaid and to the Children's Health Insurance Program. Women will lose access to critical health services covered in the ACA, like cancer screenings and immunizations; Finally, the last step is to go after another favorite GOP target, and that's Social Security. Mr. Speaker, House Republicans have only one constituency to protect, and that's the wealthiest Americans. It couldn't be more obvious.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I'm pleased to rise in support of H.R. 6672, the Pandemic and All- Hazards Preparedness Reauthorization Act of 2012. This bill reflects bipartisan work that has taken place between the House and Senate over the last several months to resolve differences between the House and Senate-passed PAHPA reauthorization bills. We all know very well that our Nation continues to face threats that require an ongoing commitment to public health and emergency preparedness. Just recently we experienced a devastating storm along the east coast--Hurricane Sandy--that destroyed entire communities in coastal New Jersey and New York, including areas within my district. The Federal Government's support, including through programs authorized by PAHPA, was critical in the wake of this disaster. The legislation before us today reauthorizes programs and activities first established as part of the Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act of 2002, the 2004 Project Bioshield Act, and the 2006 Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness. In the wake of 9/11, Congress placed a high priority on biodefense. Congress first passed the Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act of 2002 to improve the Nation's ability to respond to acts of biological terrorism. In 2004, we passed the Project Bioshield Act with tremendous bipartisan support, and Democrats and Republicans worked together to authorize the development, procurement, and emergency use of medical countermeasures for biological, chemical, radiological, and nuclear threats. We then identified some shortfalls, and in 2006 worked to amend and build upon the existing BioShield program and Department of Health and Human Services authorities by passing PAHPA. For example, PAHPA charged the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response with the Department's public health and medical response. It required, a National Health Security Strategy to guide the Department's preparedness and response efforts, reauthorize grants to improve State and local public health and hospital preparedness, and establish the Biomedical Advance Research and Development Authority to spur development of medical countermeasures. Together, BioShield and PAHPA represent more comprehensive efforts to prepare for and respond to public health emergencies, whether they're naturally occurring events like the H1N1 outbreak, or those that are deliberate, such as anthrax attacks. As a result of these bills and the investments that followed, our Nation is better equipped to respond to public health emergencies. I'd just like to take a few moments, Madam Speaker, to highlight ways that H.R. 6672 will continue the progress we've made over the past decade. First, the bill further facilitates the development of medical countermeasures through emphasizing medical countermeasures advancement in the National Health Security Strategy; requiring the development of a 5-year budget analysis of the countermeasure enterprise; and calling for the development of a countermeasure strategy and implementation plan. Second, Madam Speaker, H.R. 6672 bolsters the Nation's medical and public health preparedness and response infrastructure, including through a new authority that would allow States to redeploy personnel funded through Federal programs to the areas within their State where they're most needed in the aftermath of a disaster. Third, it strengthens and clarifies the position of Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response as the lead for HHS on emergency preparedness and response and calls for streamlining and better coordinating HHS preparedness grants with those of other departments. Next, it places even greater emphasis on the special needs of pediatric and other at-risk populations in preparing for and responding to public health emergencies. Finally, H.R. 6672 improves FDA's emergency response capabilities. It will enable FDA to authorize the distribution and use of medical countermeasures in preparation for an emergency and to take actions during an emergency that will allow for the most effective use of medical countermeasures. I'd like to thank Congressman Mike Rogers, Congressman Gene Green, and their staff who authored the original House legislation, H.R. 2405. I'd like to recognize the contributions of Chairman Upton, Chairman Pitts, Ranking Member Waxman, Congresswoman Eshoo, and Congressman Markey, and their staff in strengthening the legislation as it moved through the committee process and in discussions with the Senate. They have all worked in a bipartisan fashion over the past 1\1/2\ years to accomplish the goals of our Members and should be commended for their work. I also urge Members to join me in supporting passage of H.R. 6672. I'm hopeful that our Senate colleagues will similarly support this bill's passage so we can get the bill to the President's desk. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PALLONE. Madam Speaker, I'd like to submit letters of support from the following organizations into the Record: the Alliance for Biosecurity, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the Biotechnology Industry Organization, or BIO, the Roundtable on Critical Care Policy, and a joint letter from four public health organizations. Those are the American Public Health Association, the Association of State and Territorial Health Officials, the National Association of County and City Health Officials, and the Trust for America's Health. I yield back the balance of my time. Alliance for Biosecurity, Office of the Secretary and Legal Counsel, Washington, DC, December 17, 2012. Hon. Mike Rogers, Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC. Dear Representative Rogers: On behalf of the Alliance for Biosecurity, I write in strong support of the Pandemic All- Hazards Preparedness Reauthorization Act of 2012 (H.R. 6672). The Alliance for Biosecurity is a collaboration of pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies working to develop medical countermeasures (MCMs) to prevent and treat diseases associated with bioterrorism and emerging infectious diseases. It is essential to our nation's safety that this bill is passed by the House and Senate before the end of the 112th Congress. As you know, the chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear (CBRN) threat is real and growing. It is critical that the country continue ongoing efforts to develop, procure, and stockpile MCMs to both deter an attack and protect our citizens should a bioterrorism event occur. The Congressionally-established Commission on the Prevention of Weapons of Mass Destruction Proliferation and Terrorism 2008 report predicted that ``it is more likely than not that a weapon of mass destruction will be used in a terrorist attack somewhere in the world by the end of 2013.'' There is a limited commercial market for MCMs; consequently, without adequate advanced development and stockpiling funding, companies have neither the incentive nor the ability to invest in these life-saving therapies. Reauthorization of PAHPA and Project BioShield is critical to ensuring the sustainability of the MCM enterprise. We applaud the tireless work of you and your colleagues on this important issue and urge that this measure is brought up for consideration in the House and Senate without delay to ensure that our nation remains prepared to face such threats. Respectfully submitted on behalf of the Alliance for Biosecurity. Maureen Donahue Hardwick, Secretariat and Legal Counsel.

Mr. PALLONE. Madam Speaker, I'd like to yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Eshoo) and stress her involvement in this issue over the years.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I am pleased to rise in support of S. 1440, as amended. The legislation before us extends two existing programs and creates one new initiative, all activities that impact children's health. The first title of the legislation reauthorizes the Prematurity Research Expansion and Education for Mothers who deliver Infants Early, or PREEMIE, Act through fiscal year 2017. The PREEMIE Act was signed into law in 2006, and I was proud to be a cosponsor of the original House legislation. S. 1440, as amended, calls for further studies on factors related to prematurity, improved data on the national burden of preterm birth, continued preterm birth prevention efforts, and strengthened public and health provider education on risk factors for preterm delivery and treatments and outcomes for preterm infants. The legislation also codifies an advisory committee to the Secretary of Health and Human Services on infant mortality and directs the Secretary to coordinate existing quality studies on hospital readmissions and preterm infants. Since the enactment of the PREEMIE Act, we've seen the preterm birth rate decline to its present level of just under 12 percent, the lowest rate we've seen since the late nineties. The good news is there's been progress in better understanding the causes of premature births and promoting interventions that work. On the other hand, however, we still don't know the causes of premature birth in up to 40 percent of cases. And then there's the cost to the health care system of premature births--more than $26 billion each year--not to mention the increased risks of serious disability and death for newborns and the tremendous toll prematurity takes on their families. And that's precisely why the goals of the PREEMIE Act remain just as salient as they were 6 years ago. The second title is similar to the House-passed National Pediatric Research Network Act of 2012 and allows the National Institutes of Health to establish a national pediatric research network comprised of up to eight pediatric research consortia, or groups of collaborating institutions. The consortia will conduct basic clinical, behavioral, and translational research on pediatric diseases and conditions. Among the eight consortia, the NIH Director will ensure that an appropriate number of awards go to consortia that focus primarily on pediatric rare diseases, such as spinal muscular atrophy or birth defects such as Down syndrome. There are many rare pediatric diseases, and in some of these diseases, the children are incredibly fragile. If we can allow for research to occur across the country, not just one single location, research can be done at a larger level because children could then participate without having to travel. Additionally, we all know too well that, traditionally, pediatric research has been underfunded. That can make it hard to train and develop the research talent needed to address these devastating illnesses. The consortia can therefore be the training grounds for future researchers, helping to fill the pediatric pipeline. Finally, the third title, Madam Speaker, of the amendment to S. 1440 reauthorizes the Children's Hospitals Graduate Medical Education, or CHGME, program through fiscal year 2017. The legislation maintains the current authorization level and will support the work of 56 children's hospitals training over 5,000 pediatric residents in 30 States. The CHGME program was first established in 1999, following declines in pediatric training programs that threatened the stability of the pediatric workforce. Like any parent knows, it's important to have a trusted health provider to turn to when your child is sick or hurt. In Congress, on a bipartisan basis, we recognize that if we didn't create and fund programs to train pediatricians, there wouldn't be anyone left to care for our kids. Since its inception, the CHGME program has been a success story, supporting children's hospitals and their work to train future generations of our pediatric workforce, including pediatric subspecialists in very short supply. Representing only 1 percent of all hospitals, the small number of children's hospitals that participate in the program train approximately 40 percent of all pediatricians and nearly half of all pediatric specialists. That's why continuing this critical program will have a major impact on access to primary care and specialty care for kids. Reauthorizing this program, Madam Speaker, was one of my top health priorities of the year, and I want to thank Chairman Joe Pitts, the chairman of our Health Subcommittee, for working with me on this bill. Together with his help and leadership, we were able to move this bill through our committee and to the House floor last year. I'm hopeful that reauthorization of the CHGME program will finally make it to the President's desk as part of S. 1440. I just want to take a moment to commend Chairman Upton, Chairman Pitts, and Ranking Member Waxman for their leadership on this legislation. I have to recognize and thank the House sponsor of the PREEMIE Act and the National Pediatric Research Network Act, and those Energy and Commerce members: Congresswoman Eshoo, Congressman Lance, Congresswoman Capps, and Congresswoman McMorris Rodgers. They were really dedicated to these important issues. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PALLONE. I have no additional speakers, Madam Speaker, so I would simply ask that we support this legislation and pass it on a bipartisan basis. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. PALLONE. Madam Speaker, I would like to now yield such time as she may consume to the sponsor of the House PREEMIE Act, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Eshoo).

Mr. PALLONE. I yield such time as she may consume to the Democratic sponsor of the House National Pediatric Research Network Act of 2012, which is the second title of the legislation before us, the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Capps).

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. I thank my colleague from Texas. Mr. Speaker, I, like many of my colleagues, am concerned with the problem of identity theft--particularly identity theft from elderly individuals, who can be viewed as easy victims by unscrupulous criminals. I think we all agree that a commonsense step to prevent identity theft and further protect beneficiaries is to remove beneficiary Social Security numbers from their Medicare cards, but it's important to point out that this is not as easy as it would seem at first glance. Medicare has dozens of claims processing systems, each that will need to be modified to accept a new beneficiary number. Providers, too, will have to ensure their billing systems can accommodate the new numbers. We will need an extensive education campaign to ensure that a new numbering system or the issuance of new cards doesn't simply present a golden opportunity for unscrupulous individuals to find a new way to rip off seniors. Now, I certainly support the policy goal of H.R. 1509, the Medicare Identity Theft Prevention Act of 2012. This bill provides approximately $300 million to the Secretary of HHS to move forward on removing Social Security numbers from ID cards, yet we do not know whether that amount is sufficient. I'm concerned that if we fail to provide sufficient funding for this task, we may wind up with a programmatic mess, confusion, or even worse. I think we owe it to the Medicare beneficiaries and providers to ensure that this worthy undertaking is done well. In addition, the bill allows for funding of the Social Security Administration's costs but not the costs of the Medicare agency itself, and that's an issue that has to be addressed. So as we move forward, Mr. Speaker, we must make sure that the funding is sufficient and that both CMS and SSA can equitably access these funds. Beneficiary identity security depends on it.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. I want to thank the gentleman from Wisconsin. Madam Speaker, I rise to lend my support to H.R. 1845, as amended. This bill combines two pieces of legislation: H.R. 1845, which provides a demonstration for the coverage of home infusion of intravenous immune globulin, or IVIG, and H.R. 1063, which makes improvements to the Medicare Secondary Payer process, or MSP. However, I would like to note my concerns about the process. Our committee acted on H.R. 1063, and I commend the chairman for his efforts to ensure it was a bipartisan product, but we did not act on the IVIG legislation, which is every bit as important to our Members as the MSP. So it's my hope that in the future we can avoid situations like this. The Medicare Secondary Payer provisions of this bill will reduce the burdens of the secondary payer process for beneficiaries and other stakeholders. Most importantly, the legislation will do so in a way that ensures that we're also protecting taxpayer dollars and the Medicare trust fund. I do worry, however, that the MSP bill does not include administrative funding for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, or CMS, to implement these new changes. One of the primary complaints I hear about MSP is that stakeholders are currently frustrated because the process does not move fast enough. But here we are, legislating new responsibilities on top of an already slow process--with no funding. This will simply burden the agency and make it more difficult to get to resolution on secondary payer cases in a timely fashion. So I hope that at some future date we can provide a reasonable sum to the agency to allow them to be better equipped to speed this process along. One additional point on MSP: the new process we've established for resolving disputes of claims posted on the Web portal is not intended to supplant the ordinary appeals process for MSP activities. I believe that is clear in the language, but I want to note that there should be no ambiguity. This bill does not supplant existing appeals rights. In addition to MSP changes, this bill also provides for a 3-year demonstration related to IVIG. IVIG is a blood-derived treatment that helps strengthen the immune systems of immune-deficient patients and prevents paralysis in some autoimmune diseases and neuropathies. Currently, Medicare beneficiaries may receive home infusion of IVIG as a part B benefit; however, the equipment, nursing services, and supplies necessary for the home infusion are not reimbursed. Congresswoman Matsui has been a clear leader on this issue and it's to her credit that it's included in this package today. She's worked so tirelessly on this IVIG issue, and I'm hopeful that this demonstration project she has championed will both save money for the Medicare program and improve access to needed services for this vulnerable population. I thank her for her leadership on behalf of these patients. I also want to thank Chairman Upton for working on these two issues with us, and I look forward to the next Congress, where, hopefully, we'll find additional areas of common ground to work on.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. I thank my colleague, the ranking member from California (Mr. Waxman). Congress gave the FDA the responsibility of deciding whether specific types of inhalers containing ozone-depleting substances are essential uses and need to remain on the market, and the FDA has established an orderly and open process for making these determinations: 13 types of inhalers containing CFCs were phased out prior to the phase-out of Primatene Mist. The remaining two CFC-propelled inhalers are scheduled for phase-out at the end of 2013. The FDA determined in 2008 that Primatene Mist was not an essential use. They concluded that there are no substantial technical barriers to developing epinephrine inhalers that do not release ozone-depleting substances. At the request of Armstrong, the manufacturer of Primatene Mist, the FDA set a phase-out date of December 31, 2011, which was 1 year longer than the FDA initially proposed. The FDA took steps to prepare the public for the phase-out. It approved a label for Primatene Mist which indicated to consumers that Primatene Mist would not be available after December 31, 2011, and Primatene Mist was phased out on that date. It has not been available for the past 11 months. This bill would intervene to put Primatene Mist back on the market. It is a legislative earmark that directly benefits just one company-- Armstrong. A long list of public health groups, physician organizations, and patient advocates oppose this bill. They do not believe that returning Primatene Mist to the market is in the best interest of patients with asthma or in the best interest of public health. The following organizations, Mr. Speaker, that oppose this bill wrote to Members of the House: the American Lung Association, the American Thoracic Society, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America, Mothers of Asthmatics. I could go on. There are eight other public health organizations on this one letter alone, and I am not aware of any public health organization that supports this bill. When FDA officials briefed Members, they expressed many of the same concerns about patient confusion and of Primatene Mist no longer being the standard of care for asthma patients. Now, let's be clear, Mr. Speaker. Every public health group and patient advocacy group that has looked at this bill has concluded it is a bad idea. Congress shouldn't be overriding FDA's established regulatory process if doing so would pose significant patient confusion and undermine public health. That's just common sense. Even if we pass this bill, it would not lead to the widespread availability of Primatene Mist that is sought by the proponents of the legislation. According to Armstrong, between 2 million and 3 million people used Primatene Mist before the phase-out, but fewer than 1.5 million Primatene Mist inhalers remain in Armstrong's inventory. That means that as many as half of all previous users of Primatene Mist would not be able to obtain even one inhaler if Armstrong were allowed to sell off its remaining inventory, and it assumes that pharmacies or drug stores would even carry it. Retailers may decide not to sell inventoried units of Primatene Mist because the units will start to expire in January, and that's only a few weeks from now. So the real effect of this bill would be to provide a regulatory earmark to Armstrong rather than a rescue inhaler that would be available in the middle of the night to someone suffering from an asthma attack. Mr. Speaker, I don't know what else I can say. This is a bad bill, and I urge my colleagues to oppose it.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the previous question. The message from my constituents and from the American people is loud and clear, and that's to extend the middle class tax cuts now. Republicans are simply holding hostage tax cuts for 98 percent of Americans and 97 percent of small businesses to give more tax breaks to the wealthiest Americans. Now, Democrats have a commonsense solution, and we can't wait around any longer as real proposals languish while the House GOP gets its act together. Spearheaded by Congressman Walz, Democrats last week filed the Walz discharge petition to automatically bring to the floor the Senate-passed middle class tax cuts--which the President has said that he will sign immediately--and overwhelmingly Members have signed this discharge petition. My point is we don't have any time to waste. We can pass this extension of the middle class tax cuts now as we find a bold and balanced and fair agreement to avoid the fiscal cliff. There is a consensus that we do this. So why are the Republicans holding this hostage? Once again, let us vote ``no'' on the previous question. Let's bring this middle class tax cut up now. It is the solution.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, the message from the American people is loud and clear: extend the middle class tax cuts now. Republicans are holding hostage tax cuts for 98 percent of Americans and 97 percent of small businesses to give more tax breaks to the wealthiest Americans. Once again Republicans are playing politics with something that will help Americans get back as we work to repair the damage that 8 years of Republican leadership created. Democrats have a commonsense solution, and we can't wait around any longer to let real proposals languish until the House GOP gets its act together. Spearheaded by Congressman Tim Walz, Democrats filed the Walz discharge petition to automatically bring to the House floor the Senate-passed middle class tax cuts which the President has said he will sign immediately. We have no time to waste, Mr. Speaker. Pass the extension of the middle class tax cuts now as we find a bold, balanced, and fair agreement to avoid the fiscal cliff.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate IBEW Local 269 as its members gather to celebrate its 100th Anniversary. The spirit and strength of the IBEW's founders continues today in Local 269 and its history and service is truly deserving of this body's recognition. The founders of the IBEW fought for the benefit of the workers. The founders strived to create workers' rights, safety measures and apprenticeship training. Today, the IBEW continues the legacy of its founders to make a better life for all, and these principles are evident in Local 269. IBEW Local 269 ensures that central New Jersey and Bucks County, Pennsylvania receive highly skilled and qualified electrical workers. IBEW Local 269 is committed to upholding its expectation of quality craftsmanship and on-budget projects with a 5-year apprenticeship training program. The specialized members work as wiremen, outside linemen, residential wiremen, and telecommunications technicians to help develop and maintain communities. They are experienced in working in a wide range of areas, including airports, educational institutions, military installations, historical sites and monuments, and many others. Since 1912, the members of IBEW Local 269 have provided proficient service to the community. Mr. Speaker, once again, please join me in honoring IBEW Local 269 and its 100th Anniversary.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. I want to thank my colleague for those remarks. And just very briefly, if I can say as a senior Member of the Democrats, Don, Jr. has excelled in his own right. As was mentioned, he's been a councilman in the city of Newark for a while. He has also been a county freeholder in Essex County, New Jersey. And I could go through the long list of accomplishments that he's made himself for the city of Newark and the other towns that he now represents in the congressional district. But I do have to say your father would be so proud. He's looking down today. And you must know, for all of you who loved his dad so much, that he is very much like his father in every respect in that he respects everyone. He has the sympathy--your father always talked about simpatico, the Italian sympathy, because he grew up in the Italian section of Newark, and that's something that's shared very much by Don as well. He will be someone that you will all learn to love the way you learned to love his father. Congratulations.