Tom Price

Mr. PRICE of Georgia

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Madam Speaker, on rollcall Nos. 51 and 66 I was unable to be present to vote. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''

Mr. PRICE of Georgia

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. I thank my friend from New Jersey for his leadership on this issue and trying to bring focus to really the underlying nature of this bill, which is the underlying nature of this amendment as well, and that is that government knows best how to define what the market ought to look like and not the market. Madam Chair, as you well know, that's one of the things that got us into these significant problems in the first place. I know that there is one group that supports this. There are all sorts of folks who don't support this, the people who know about the issue of trading in this area. The ABA Securities Association, one of the largest securities associations, opposes this amendment because they believe that it would significantly limit competition and undermine the ultimate goal that all of us ought to have, and that is to make certain that the market is, in fact, able to work for more individuals across this land. More choices, not fewer choices. New York Stock Exchange, Euronext, Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association, on and on and on, folks who, in fact, oppose this amendment because they believe strongly that it will decrease the choices available to the American people. Over-the-counter trades, hundreds of trillions of dollars literally in trades, will be markedly limited again, decreasing the ability of the American people to have the choices available to them. What this amendment does, Madam Chair, is what really what the underlying bill does. It says government knows best, that we ought to limit the ability of creative thinking and jobs to be formed out there across this land, because government knows best. We are going to limit the choices available to the American people. Vote ``no'' on the Lynch amendment.

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Madam Chairman, parliamentary inquiry.

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. I believe the Chair stated that amendment No. 13 was in order. Is the majority party skipping number 13?

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. I thank the Chair. Amendment No. 14 Offered by Mr. McCarthy of California

Mr. PRICE of Georgia

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from California for his leadership on this issue and so many other things. Here we go again, Mr. Speaker. Here it is. We got the bill right here. Another late night, another thousand-plus-page bill that virtually nobody in this House has read, and another government takeover. This ought to be called the ``unending bailout authority, credit- restricting, and permanent job loss act,'' Mr. Speaker. It not only doesn't solve the problem of government bailouts, it codifies them. It writes them into law. It makes them permanent, putting us into a permanent political economy, politicians picking winners and losers. Mr. Speaker, this is a very dangerous time. The American people are concerned about jobs and the stagnant economy, and the majority party comes to this floor with this bill that will destroy hundreds of thousands of jobs and further harm the economy. Why? Well, Mr. Speaker, as a physician, I'm here to tell you, I think they got the wrong diagnosis, just like in health care. Their prescription for health care was a government takeover, and now they want a government takeover of our economy and our financial services area because their prescription is wrong. If we conclude as a society that we are here because of a failure of free-market capitalism and a failure of deregulation, then our kids and our grandkids will lose, because all of the solutions will harm free- market capitalism, depress the economy, and increase regulation, which will destroy jobs and destroy our economy. We're not here because of a failure of free-market capitalism, Mr. Speaker. We're here because of a failure of the government distorting the market, because of politicians getting involved. We're not here because of a failure of deregulation. We're here because of foolish and inflexible regulation and because of government edicts that made it so people couldn't do their jobs. The Democrat prescription for this, then, is to take over and control the entire economy, thereby destroying jobs and destroying our economy. The shame of all of that, Mr. Speaker, is that there are wonderful solutions. We believe that there ought not be any more bailouts.

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. I thank the gentleman. We believe there ought not be any more bailouts. No more bailouts. Like the American people, we know what the American people know, and that is if there is no risk, there can be no reward. Mr. Speaker, we believe that government ought to get out of the business of picking winners and losers. This bill doesn't create jobs; it destroys them, absolutely destroys them. We know that markets must be allowed to function and to innovate in order to be profitable. And the economy cannot and will not recover without these things. In so many ways, this bill kills jobs and harms the economy. The American people want to end the bailouts, the Wall Street bailouts that the majority party so desires to have that they wrote it into this law, and they want to make certain we get back to the business of freeing up the economy to increase jobs and allow free-market capitalism to work. That's what will restore the confidence of the American people. I thank the gentleman from California for this time.

Mr. PRICE of Georgia

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Thank you. As a physician, I know that the SGR, the sustainable growth rate, is neither sustainable nor growing. It is, however, truly destroying the ability of doctors to provide the needed care for patients across our land. And though the underlying bill is an acknowledgement that there is a huge problem and may be a step in the right direction, it exacerbates the phenomenal fiscal recklessness of this administration and the majority party. As a physician, I know with every fiber of my being that the doctors of this land are sick and tired of being played for fools, duped into support of another nonsolution because there is not a commitment to a responsible revenue stream with a recognition of the care that they provide. With this trick, the majority demeans our Nation's caring and compassionate physicians. So let's commit to solve this challenge together, positively, with a plan that respects those who have dedicated their lives to our health. Mr. Speaker, our Nation is at a fiscal tipping point. We can continue to march further and further to the liberal left and bankrupt our Nation's future, or we can restore fiscal sanity to an overgrown and unrestrained Federal budget. Our motion to recommit is a step in the right direction, not another plan that further adds to our Nation's debt and contributes to the financial ruin of future generations. Mr. Speaker, the American people are demanding a stop to runaway debt. They reject this spending and they reject this trick. Let's stand up for fiscal responsibility and vote for the responsible Republican solution.

Mr. PRICE of Georgia

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, parliamentary inquiry.

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I was just wondering if this was a stalling tactic by the majority party on delaying the vote on this important bill which will kill 5.5 million jobs today?

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, continuing to reserve the right to object.

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. I understand that this may be a train that is rolling, but it appears that the majority side is interested in stalling this bill. Would it be appropriate to ask unanimous consent that all extension and revision of remarks could be done en bloc.

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, continuing to observe the right to object, how about increasing the debate time? It appears that the majority party is attempting to expand their debate time. I would ask unanimous consent that each side be added 1 hour of debate time.

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the right to object.

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Again, Mr. Speaker, it is my understanding that the majority party appears to be continuing to delay the process here. It would be appropriate, if the majority party is interested in fairness in this process, to provide for increasing debate time on both sides of the aisle.

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I object.

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, continuing to reserve then, if you are not interested in obtaining my objection, continuing to reserve, again it appears that this is a process by which the majority party is interested once again in trying to subvert the rules and expand the debate time on the majority side.

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object.

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Is it not appropriate for a Member of the House to be able to reserve a right to object on a unanimous consent request?

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Further inquiry, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. I object.

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. I object.

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. PRICE of Georgia. At the time that a unanimous consent request is made, the Speaker has apparently determined that the statement, as soon as it is completed, does not allow for a reservation. Is it not, under the rules of the House, appropriate for a Member of the House to reserve a right to object based upon a unanimous consent request?