Paul Ryan

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume for the purpose of closing. Mr. Speaker, as I saw Steve Scalise talk about that play--I am a big NFC fan, and I remember that play. My friend Aaron Stecker, who is a friend of mine from Wisconsin, played on that team at that time. I just have to say, Mr. Speaker, in America, we have all of these heroes, and the best among us are the heroes that have been so high and have been brought so low but have come back up and have shown a great example of courage to the rest of us. We are very pleased to be bringing this bill to the floor. I basically want to thank the members of the Louisiana delegation for bringing this issue to our attention, for making us know about this. This is one of those things where the bureaucracy just got it wrong. The bureaucracy basically came up with a rule that effectively denied these devices to people, which means they can't live a full life. These SGDs are invaluable. They are absolutely essential for people suffering from ALS to be able to communicate and to be able to function. I had a constituent at a town hall meeting walk me through how his eye gaze technology worked as a part of SGD, and it is just truly remarkable. So this is one of those issues that speaks to absolute common sense. The bureaucracy got it wrong, and this is Congress in action. This is democracy in action. Our constituents brought us an issue. We understood that there was a problem that needed to be solved. So, in a bipartisan basis, here we are, passing legislation, fixing this problem so that we can make sure that this program, Medicare, fulfills its mission by making sure that it is there for the people who need it. That is democracy. I want to thank the people from Louisiana for bringing this to our attention. I urge the passage of this bill. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Burgess), the author of this legislation, a Member of the Energy and Commerce Committee, and a physician.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers, and I am prepared to close.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I act on the sentiment of the gentleman from Washington. I urge Members to vote for the bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. I have no further speakers. Since I reserve the right to close, I will let the gentleman finish his speakers, and then I will do a quick close.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 338, I call up the bill (H.R. 1295) to extend the African Growth and Opportunity Act, the Generalized System of Preferences, the preferential duty treatment program for Haiti, and for other purposes, with the Senate amendment to the House amendment to the Senate amendment thereto, and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Tiberi), the chairman of the Trade Subcommittee.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I have a motion at the desk.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material to H.R. 1295, the Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, as amended, currently under consideration.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Washington (Mr. Reichert), a senior member of the Committee on Ways and Means, the chairman of the Subcommittee on Select Revenue Measures, who is the author of the Trade Adjustment Assistance bill.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, people on both sides of the aisle have been working for years to promote American trade. We took big steps when we passed TPA last week and sent it to the President yesterday. Passing TPA, I believe, is an achievement that this Congress should be very proud of. It is going to empower Congress in trade negotiations. It will help America get the best possible trade agreements for American workers, and it will tell the world that the America that they knew and the America that they know is an America that is still willing to lead. I especially want to thank my colleagues in the House, like Congressman Ron Kind and Congressman Earl Blumenauer, for their leadership on this issue. I also want to thank our friends in the Senate, like Senators Hatch and Wyden. But to pass TPA, we needed a little bit of trust. We promised our Democratic friends, if they stay with us on TPA, that we will follow through with this bill that is before us today, and so we are here today to keep our word. There are three parts to this bill, all three of which have bipartisan support. First, we reauthorize the Trade Adjustment Assistance Act, which is in keeping with the agreements that we have made. This program helps workers whose jobs have moved elsewhere to find new opportunities through job training. Traditionally, we have always authorized TPA and TAA, and that is what we are doing here. We have always authorized them together, and that is effectively what we are doing here. We have made some improvements to the program. Second, we reauthorize a number of trade preferences for developing countries. This bill reauthorizes a number of programs that have broad bipartisan support: AGOA, GSP, and Haiti Hope. These programs lower trade barriers between our country and these developing countries. It is the best example of trade not aid that you can come up with. They grow our trading ties, because when we grow, they grow. This is good policy that has been well respected and supported by both sides of the aisle. Therefore, we have every incentive to get this done. Third, we make sure that our companies can use our trade remedy laws to address unfair trade practices. This is something that we have worked with our colleagues on both sides of the aisle, our colleagues from steel country and the House Steel Caucus, to make sure that our trade laws are actually enforced and, when our trade laws are not being followed, when they are being abused, that we have quick remedies to these situations. All of this legislation will strengthen the American economy. It will strengthen America's credibility on the world stage, and it will strengthen American leadership. With that, I urge its passage. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, at this time, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman Pennsylvania (Mr. Meehan), a distinguished Member of the Ways and Means Committee.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. I yield the gentleman an additional 1 minute.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds. I add my thanks, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Tiberi left, but he did a lot of work on this legislation. He did yeoman's work on it. I just want to echo the sentiment that has been said here, which is passing these very challenging bills, doing a number of bills, did require a lot of trust between the two parties, which we have not seen a lot of lately. I am just very pleased to be a part of this dynamic where we have given each other our words, we have kept our words, and therefore, we are getting this done. As a result of that, I believe that the country is far better off. This policy is good for America, and it restores our leadership in the world. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Paulsen), a distinguished member of the Ways and Means Committee and a member of the Trade Subcommittee, in an effort to try and restore the civil dialogue and bipartisan dialogue we have been having.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, let me yield myself 1 minute to try and clarify some of what was just mentioned. The reason we are here with this bill and the reason TAA is attached to the AGOA bill is because of the dilatory tactics from the minority a couple of weeks ago. In keeping with our word, we brought this Trade Preferences bill through the House on its own stand-alone. And so the reason this is happening is not because of the majority, but because of what the minority did with respect to the TAA bill. So I just want to be very clear, that is why we are where we are. Having said all of that, we are still keeping our agreement going that these bills are going through. The second point I would like to make is TPP does not exist yet. There is no Trans-Pacific Partnership trade agreement. There are talks. There have been talks for years, and those talks are still ongoing. But we do not have a trade agreement yet. That was why we needed to pass TPA, so that we can get a trade agreement like TPP. So I would just encourage all Members not to oppose something they have not yet seen, not to prejudge an agreement that does not yet exist.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself an additional 1 minute. It is very important that we recognize 95 percent of the world's consumers. They don't live in this country. They live in other countries. And if we want good jobs that pay more, we need to be able to make and grow things in America and sell them overseas into other markets, other countries. Since TPA last expired in 2007, there have been 100 trade agreements negotiated and enacted around the world where we were a party to zero, none of them. What that means is other countries are lowering the trade barriers between themselves, and we, America, by not being a part of this, have much higher barriers. So when we want to make something and sell it overseas, it is a lot more expensive for them to buy our products than buying our competitors' products. There were 48 trade agreements enacted in Asia since 2000 alone. We were a party to two of them.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, giving myself an additional 30 seconds, we were a party to two of those agreements and, as a result, our share of trade going into Asia, meaning exports going there from our country, went down 42 percent. One in five jobs is tied to trade. These jobs pay more. This is about jobs. So I would simply encourage our Members: Don't take a position on something that doesn't exist yet. Read. See with your own eyes, then form an opinion. But I would argue, it is not in your constituents' interest to simply say what you are for or against before you even see what it is. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, first I would like to clarify a few things. The reason we are here is because of the defeat of TAA the first time it came through here. That is why this bill is such this way. The idea that by combining this for the Preferences was somehow a plan in the other body to defeat the two bills, I would just like to remind people that the first Preferences bill passed 97-1 when it passed the Senate. This bill was voice-voted in the Senate yesterday, so if someone was planning on trying to defeat these bills, they sure picked the wrong way to go about doing it. What is really happening here is a commitment is being honored the second time around to make sure that these bills have passed, and I am pleased to see that. So I don't read into anything that the other body did other than respond to the fact that TAA was defeated here the first time around. Now we have rebuilt the process, kept the agreements, and here we are passing a bill that the Senate voice-voted yesterday. Why is this important, Mr. Speaker? These three bills are bipartisan. TAA is offered by Mr. Reichert, a Republican from Washington. Preferences is something that has gotten near universal support from both sides of the aisle. It is very good policy, and everyone on both sides of the aisle is in favor of TAA. We also have heard from our manufacturers that they need trade remedy, that when another country and a company from another country violate our trade laws and dump product into our market, we ought to be able to do something about it. So there is a bipartisan acknowledgment on that front, too. That is why this package is here. I anticipate a good vote count. At the end of the day, Mr. Speaker, the reason we are doing this is because we care about workers, we care about American leadership, and we care about jobs. The reason you need trade agreements is to remove those barriers so that the little guy, the small business, can also have access to these foreign markets. That is one of the elements to this debate that I think is missing. Without trade agreements, big businesses can survive, no problem. Do you know why? Because big businesses can just erect a factory in another country to sell into that other country. It happens all the time. We call it outsourcing. So a big company can set up a factory in another country, hire people in that other country, and ship our jobs over there to make their product there to sell into those markets. Trade agreements, on the other hand, remove those barriers, make it so that you can build it here and send it over there. That means small businesses can also get engaged in trade. Small businesses can also get access to these markets. So by getting in a trade agreement, we remove those barriers from these countries who say, ``If you want to sell your product in our country, then make it in our country,'' to getting a trade agreement saying, ``We remove these barriers, and we will allow you to make it in your country, America, and send it here.'' Mr. Speaker, that is why we want trade agreements, so we can keep jobs and keep manufacturing in America, make and grow more things here so that we can have more jobs here and send them over there. It is why we have a trade surplus in manufacturing with the countries we had trade agreements with and a big manufacturing deficit with the countries we do not have trade agreements with. We are pretty generous, Mr. Speaker. We already let a lot of other countries sell their goods into our country. Just go through Walmart, Farm & Fleet, K-Mart, or Shopko, wherever you go buy stuff, and you will see things made in other countries all down the aisle. I bought this shirt I am wearing right now in Kenosha, Wisconsin, at the outlet mall. It was made in Malaysia. Go to these other countries, and you will not see something similar. You will not see a bunch of American products on their store shelves. Trade agreements say: Hey, wait, that is not fair. Let's make it fair. You give us the same kind of access to your country that we are giving you to our country. That is what we get with trade agreements; level the playing field, keep it fair, and give us access to the fact that we have one in five jobs in America tied to trade, the fact that these jobs on average pay 18 percent more, so that we can keep that going so that we can have more jobs with higher wages. That is what this is about. When a worker is displaced--if a worker is displaced--TAA is there to help that person get job training skills and benefits so they can get a new skill to get a new job to keep their life going where they want it to go. So that is why I expect a good vote here today. I am pleased that we are able to honor the agreements that were made, and I am very pleased that we are sending the signal to the rest of the world that this country is still willing and able to lead. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 319, I call up the bill (H.R. 1190) to repeal the provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act providing for the Independent Payment Advisory Board, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 1190, Protecting Seniors' Access to Medicare Act of 2015, currently under consideration.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. What we are bringing to the floor today is Dr. Roe's bill to repeal the Independent Payment Advisory Board. This is a bill that came out of the Committee on Ways and Means with a bipartisan vote. This is an agency that Members on both sides of the aisle believe does not have the right to exist, should not exist, and does not follow our democratic process. Let me explain why we are doing this. There is no greater example of the conflict of visions than this. ObamaCare created something called IPAB, the Independent Payment Advisory Board. It is a board of 15 people who are not elected or appointed. They have the power to cut Medicare's payments for treatment. They have a quota which they have to hit in order to find the same number to actually cut. Every year, a formula kicks in, and the 15 unelected bureaucrats find where they are going to cut Medicare payments to providers to hit that quota. They can do all of this without Congress' approval. The idea, of course, is that unelected bureaucrats know best, unelected bureaucrats know better than patients, their doctors, or their representatives in Congress; they will know which treatment works the best because they are detached, they are distant, they are above the fray, they are not involved in the emotions or the personal relationships that such personal decisions like your health care ultimately involve. That is the big problem. They are totally unaccountable. They are divorced from reality. Health care is not a statistic. It is not a formula. It is not uniform. It is not cookie cutter. It is personal. It is individual. It is distinct. Every patient is different. This is why patients, along with their doctors, need to be put in charge of their health care. What IPAB would essentially do is ration health care. It would take control away from patients. Now, the other side says, Hey, no, not so fast; Congress can override them--but that is only with a supermajority vote. Mr. Speaker, we have seen this movie before. It never ends well. Seniors will suffer the consequences. Medicare is more than a program; Medicare is a promise. Seniors have worked hard; they have paid their taxes; they have planned on Medicare throughout all their working lives, and now that they are retired, it is something that they deserve, a secure retirement. It needs to be there, just like it has been for our parents. Think about what a Member of Congress will do. This Board of unelected bureaucrats will say, We are cutting Medicare X, Y, and Z ways to these providers for Medicare, which will deny services to seniors; and they will do it according to this formula that is in law. If Congress doesn't like it, then the law says Congress has to go cut Medicare somewhere else and overturn this ruling with a three-fifths supermajority vote in the House and the Senate--as if that would ever happen. All this thing has done, it is designed to basically go around Congress, go around the laws, and have unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats ration care for our seniors. This is wrong; it is undemocratic; it does not fit with our Constitution, and we think it ought to be repealed. That is why we are bringing this bill to the House. I reserve the balance of my time. House of Representatives, Committee on Energy and Commerce, Washington, DC, June 12, 2015. Hon. Paul Ryan, Chairman, Committee on Ways and Means, Washington, DC. Dear Chairman Ryan: I write in regard to H.R. 1190, Protecting Seniors' Access to Medicare Act of 2015, which was ordered reported by the Committee on Ways and Means on June 2, 2015. As you are aware, the bill also was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. I wanted to notify you that the Committee on Energy and Commerce will forgo action on H.R. 1190 so that it may proceed expeditiously to the House floor for consideration. This is done with the understanding that the Committee on Energy and Commerce's jurisdictional interests over this and similar legislation are in no way diminished or altered. In addition, the Committee reserves the right to seek conferees on H.R. 1190 and requests your support when such a request is made. I would appreciate your response confirming this understanding with respect to H.R. 1190 and ask that a copy of our exchange of letters on this matter be included in the Congressional Record during consideration of the bill on the House floor. Sincerely, Fred Upton, Chairman.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 321, I call up the bill (H.R. 2146) to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow Federal law enforcement officers, firefighters, and air traffic controllers to make penalty-free withdrawals from governmental plans after age 50, and for other purposes, with the Senate amendment thereto, and ask for its immediate consideration.