Henry Waxman

Mr. WAXMAN

Mr. WAXMAN. Notwithstanding the fact the gentleman yielded back his time, I want to now use the remainder of mine, but I won't, even though I could, but in the interest of comity and good will, I won't complain, I won't go on, I will simply yield back my time and urge Members to support this worthwhile piece of legislation, which is now being, hopefully, passed for the second time.

Mr. WAXMAN

Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Speaker and my colleagues, the Senate only passed this bill a couple of nights ago. And so we have now the opportunity to vote to take it or reject it. Some on the other side of the aisle, Republicans, are saying we should reject the whole bill because of the Tester amendment, which exempts small farmer-producers and facilities. We didn't have that in our bill, and I would have preferred that the Senate had not adopted that provision. But I don't think it is a reason to vote against this whole bill. This bill is a good bill. It is supported by the Consumer Federation of America, the Consumers Union, the National Consumers League, the Trust for America's Health, the American Public Health Association. And it's supported by major industry groups, the Food Marketing Institute, the Grocery Manufacturers Association, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Now, I would assume that some big operations don't like the fact that small ones are going to be exempt. They are only exempt from a couple of the provisions which Senator Tester and the Senate Members thought were too burdensome. And some of these small operations are limited in their income, and therefore it might be too burdensome for them. Republicans have suggested we should have gone to conference. If we had gone to conference, only one Senator could object and no conferees would be appointed by the Senate. So that burden we are being asked to have achieved is something we could not achieve in the short time available to us. Let us not let this opportunity go by. We must adopt this legislation. If there are efforts to change it later on, fine. But this is an important bill that has been worked on for years. It had strong bipartisan support in the House. It had overwhelming bipartisan support in the Senate. And I want to clarify the record to point out that almost all the groups, the consumer groups and the industry groups, are urging an ``aye'' vote.

Mr. WAXMAN

Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Speaker, no country has done more than the United States to advance the cause of Palestinian statehood. We have done so in recognition of Palestinian aspirations for a brighter and more stable future as well as Israel's desire for a secure and peaceful coexistence with its neighbors. As one of the largest grantors of Palestinian aid, we have worked to ensure that a future Palestinian state has the political, economic and social infrastructure to support a stable functioning democracy. But our efforts have been predicated on the Palestinians' own internationally-witnessed commitments to seek a negotiated solution to achieve a two-state peace agreement. These commitments served at the core of the 1991 Madrid conference, and were codified in the 1993 Oslo Accords, the 2003 Roadmap for Peace, the 2007 Annapolis declaration, two UN Security Council resolutions sponsored by the Bush Administration in 2002 and 2008, and reaffirmed at the 2010 summit brokered by President Obama. It is only through direct negotiations that the parties can resolve the core issues of borders, water, refugees, Jerusalem, and the security arrangements and produce an agreement that ends the conflict and sustains a viable independent Palestinian state. For all who complain that Israeli settlement construction is the primary obstacle to the peace talks, the reality is that Israeli leaders have time and again shown bold leadership to make difficult concessions on this issue and others for the sake of peace. The Israeli government's recent 10-month settlement moratorium and its serious consideration of a further extension are proof that settlements are not the stumbling block keeping us from direct talks. Rather, it is the Palestinian leadership's unwillingness to make tough choices that has sidelined the process. And if anything, a unilateral drive to statehood is chilling evidence. A strategy to bypass the negotiations process and unilaterally declare Palestinian statehood will turn the clock backward, not forward. It is a reckless tactic that threatens to intensify the conflict and alienate the United States, which by law would be prohibited from providing aid to an independent Palestinian State that does not, among other conditions, have a full and normal relationship with Israel. I urge my colleagues to support this resolution and call on others in the international community to pressure the Palestinian leadership to demonstrate their dedication to achieving statehood by returning to the negotiating table.

Mr. WAXMAN

Mr. WAXMAN. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 6533, the Local Community Radio Act of 2010. I want to thank Chairman Boucher for his leadership in guiding this bipartisan bill through the Energy and Commerce Committee and the House last year. I also want to recognize and thank Mr. Doyle and Mr. Terry--the original sponsors of the bill--for their tireless leadership in pushing this legislation forward, and for their commitment to expanding diversity, localism, and competition in our media landscape. Mr. Doyle has been an energetic champion of local community radio, and I greatly appreciate his leadership, flexibility, and perseverance. I have long-supported expanding Low Power FM radio services. This bill removes a statutory barrier to the creation of potentially thousands of new low power stations across the country. The creation of these stations will further the overriding national policy goals of promoting broadcast localism and diversity. At the same time, this legislation fully protects incumbent radio broadcasters from unreasonable interference, with a clear dispute resolution process to mitigate interference with station transmissions. In December 2009, the House has approved the Local Community Radio Act by voice vote. Since that time, however, the bill has been held up in the Senate due to ongoing concerns from some broadcasters. To address these concerns, Mr. Doyle, Mr. Terry, Senator Cantwell, and Senator McCain have been working diligently to eliminate outstanding objections so we can finally pass this legislation and send it to President Obama for signature. It is my hope that the Senate will take up H.R. 6533 promptly and do just that. Most notably, this revised version of the bill incorporates additional interference remediation procedures preferred by the broadcasters. I am pleased that H.R. 6533 now has the full support of the National Association of Broadcasters. I want to thank NAB for working with us cooperatively to move this legislation closer to passage. I also want to thank the Prometheus Radio Project, the United Church of Christ, and other long-time supporters of Low Power FM services for their input and support. This is a good bipartisan bill that will promote localism and diversity over the airwaves. I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 6533.

Mr. WAXMAN

Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Chair, I will vote for this tax package that is before us tonight. While there is absolutely no reason to justify or defend the extension of the Bush tax cuts for wealthy Americans, and the unconscionable tax treatment of wealthy estates--both of which were insisted upon by the Republicans--those egregious giveaways to those who need or deserve it least are, in fact, more than balanced by generous support for tens of millions of households across the country. I will vote for the Pomeroy amendment to restore the estate tax to sensible levels. There is no justification for massive estate tax relief for the Nation's 6,600 wealthiest families, at a cost of $25 billion to America's taxpayers. Despite continuing the Bush tax cuts for those earning over $250,000 per year, and despite the estate tax provisions, this initiative, forged by President Obama, does a lot of good. We are extending unemployment insurance for 13 more months. It is desperately needed by those who simply cannot find jobs after being out of work for months. We are providing continued income tax rate relief for two years for the middle class. The payroll tax holiday is an enormously progressive reform at a time when it is most needed to boost take home pay. The extension of the child tax credit and the tuition tax credit in particular will greatly assist income security for American families. The green energy tax provisions will help create jobs and promote clean energy technology. The bottom line is: This economy needs more jobs. We need to get unemployment down and growth up. Working Americans need more cash in their pockets. The economy needs a major jolt to go forward. This package delivers on these urgent needs. While I take no pride in any vote to give unearned financial rewards to the very wealthiest among us, I cannot in good conscience be party to legislative deadlock that means only one thing: millions of people cut off from unemployment insurance before Christmas, and a big tax hit on the middle class and working Americans as the new year begins. If we do not act, they will suffer grievously. That must not be permitted to happen. I must point out that the fact that the tax cuts last only two years and will not be permanently extended is a major plus for me. When our economy recovers, our high priority to reduce the deficit will require us to both cut spending and raise revenues. I am pleased the President has pledged that he will not further extend or make permanent the upper income tax cuts. I support the President's proposals, and urge my colleagues to join in supporting this legislation.

Mr. WAXMAN

Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Speaker, it is with a heavy heart that I join my colleagues in mourning the devastating losses Israel suffered in the Carmel fire. It is a human tragedy and an environmental tragedy. As we pay tribute to those who gave their lives in an effort to save others, we can at least find comfort in the wave of international support and assistance that enabled Israel to extinguish the massive fire within days. The United State is proud to have a played a leading role in these efforts by procuring and delivering the massive quantities of firefighting materials that were used in multiple sorties over the affected areas. We rallied to Israel's side because she is a close ally and friend. And so many other countries eagerly responded as well because, quite frankly--Israel is among the first to offer aid when others are in need. After earthquakes in Haiti, Chile, Colombia, Turkey, China, Pakistan and Iran, Israelis were among the first to join the rescue missions or send supplies. They have helped Cyprus and Greece in battling forest fires and provided aid in the aftermath of Central American floods, Asian typhoons, and the tragic 2004 tsunami. An Israeli team arrived in Louisiana shortly after our own Hurricane Katrina. Sadly, one casualty of the Carmel fire is Yemin Orde, a youth village founded in 1953 to accommodate orphans who immigrated to Israel after the Holocaust. Today, the campus is home to more than 500 children from ages 9 to 19 that have been resettled from Russia, Ethiopia, and elsewhere where they lived in orphanages, had no family to care for them, or experienced traumatic life events. While the children and staff were safely evacuated as the fire broke out, more than 40 percent of the village's facilities were destroyed by the flames and many children had to relive the trauma of being suddenly uprooted from their familiar world. I have been to Yemin Orde. I share their sorrow and their conviction to ensure that these vulnerable children and the school's vital mission continue to be cared for now and in the future. U.S. teams are already on the ground working with Israeli experts to stabilize the area and make sure that the forest can be successfully replanted. Today, communities across the United States are mobilizing through the Jewish National Fund and other organizations to help Israel preserve, replant and restore. The blue box of the JNF was a permanent feature in my parents' home, collecting coins to plant trees in the budding state of Israel and its mission continues in earnest. With partnership and determination we can look forward to a day when the Carmel forest will flourish again. As Israelis survey the devastation in Carmel, they can take solace that they were not alone at a time of crisis and that they will not be alone in the rebuilding effort.

Mr. WAXMAN

Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Speaker, I speak today in support of H.R. 4994, the ``Medicare and Medicaid Extenders Act of 2010.'' This legislation blocks a 25 percent fee cut that is scheduled for Medicare physician payments on January 1, 2011. A cut of that magnitude would jeopardize the access of seniors and people with disabilities to their doctors. Likewise, military families who rely on TRICARE need this legislation, because TRICARE uses Medicare rates and would also face a huge fee cut on January 1. The recent practice of Congress to legislate on physician payments several times per year needs to stop. Upon enactment, this will make the fifth SGR bill Congress has passed in 13 months. I am pleased that this legislation, unlike other recent SGR bills, would address the problem for an entire year. However, a 1-year solution is far less than the Medicare program ultimately needs. Congress must eventually confront the SGR permanently. The House has previously passed a permanent solution to the SGR problem. I hope that the next Congress is able to follow up on that work and fix this problem once and for all. This bill also ensures the continued ability of Medicare beneficiaries to access therapy benefits to help them recover from illness. And it contains other important technical changes to maintain the smooth functioning of the Medicare and Medicaid programs. Other provisions of this bill help low income Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries. One provision helps low-income Medicare beneficiaries cover the cost of their Medicare Part B premiums. Another extends the transitional medical assistance program to help Medicaid beneficiaries as they work more hours and increase their earnings. This legislation is completely paid for, and it is necessary. It passed the Senate by unanimous consent, and I hope that all Members of the House will support it as well. One further note for purposes of interpretation. Section 204 of this bill contains a technical amendment to Section 340B of the Public Health Services Act. This language corrects an error in P.L. 111-152, the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, that inadvertently caused children's hospitals to lose access to orphan drugs at 340B prices. The language in Section 204 restores full access to orphan drugs at 340B prices for these hospitals. This amendment is retroactive as if included in P.L. 111-152. The intent of this retroactivity is to clarify congressional intent that there be no discontinuity in access to orphan drugs at 340B prices for childrens' hospitals. To the extent that drug manufacturers have not provided these discounts at any point between the enactment of P.L. 111-152 and the enactment of this legislation, they should do so retroactively, subject to HRSA or any other compliance and enforcement authority.

Mr. WAXMAN

Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Speaker, the House passed the food safety bill a year ago July. Not this July, but the July in 2009. And we waited for the Senate to act, and they recently acted by 73-25 in favor of the legislation. When we had it before us it was 283 supporters. Now, the Senate made some changes in the bill. But all advocacy groups, all the public interest groups, have told us that FDA needs this legislation to be able to protect the American people from unsafe food, whether it's domestic or foreign imported foods. This legislation gives them important tools. They have clear authority to issue and require manufacturers to meet strong, enforceable standards to ensure the safety of various types of foods. This bill does not create unnecessary burdens for farmers and small businesses. It would allow FDA to exercise their new authorities and require manufacturers to implement actions like preventive systems to stop outbreaks before they occur. I would have preferred the House bill rather than the amendment in the Senate bill. But sometimes you have to accept a change that you may not favor at first blush. But to have us defeat this bill and have the American people go without the tools in FDA's hands to stop unsafe foods would be irresponsible. I urge support for the legislation.

Mr. WAXMAN

Mr. WAXMAN. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of Rep. Butterfield's motion for a resolution to reprimand Rep. Charles Rangel of New York. I do not have any doubt about the thoroughness of the review or the accuracy of the findings of the Committee on Standards of Official conduct, nor do I doubt that Mr. Rangel violated the rules of the House of Representatives. I disagree, however, with the Committee's judgment that the weight of evidence in this case and the ``cumulative nature of the violations'' cited in the Committee's report warrant censure of Mr. Rangel. Precedent does not support the punishment of censure--specifically, as cited in the Committee report, because Mr. Rangel's actions did not result in ``any direct personal financial gain.'' There have been lesser punishments for much more serious transgressions. When the Committee found a Speaker of the House, former Rep. Newt Gingrich, to have engaged in ``activity involving 501(c)(3) organizations that was substantially motivated by partisan, political goals,'' and that Mr. Gingrich's provision of ``material information . . . was inaccurate, incomplete, and unreliable,'' the Committee did not vote for a resolution of censure, but of reprimand. Mr. Gingrich was still Speaker in 1997 when the House approved a reprimand, and he continued serving as Speaker after he was punished. Mr. Rangel was removed earlier this year as Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee well before the Committee sent its report to the House. There are many other precedents in which the House has issued letters of reproval--a punishment less serious than reprimand--for activities that can be viewed at least as serious as those engaged in by Mr. Rangel, including sexual transgressions, impermissible campaign solicitations, misappropriation of campaign funds, and acceptance of personal gifts, among many others. Madam Speaker, I do not condone what Mr. Rangel did, but I believe that justice requires punishment proportionate to the offenses that have been proved. By the standards and precedents of the House, and particularly taking into account that there was no personal financial gain involved, I believe a punishment of censure as proposed by the Ethics Committee is excessive. I will therefore support, in furtherance of upholding the rules and standards of the House of Representatives, a reprimand of Mr. Rangel.

Mr. WAXMAN

Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Speaker, there are not many Holocaust survivors left in the world. Each year as the number dwindles, we worry about how people will remember the evils of the Holocaust when there are no longer eye-witnesses to give their personal accounts. We promote remembrance and teach tolerance. We fight Holocaust deniers and those who grotesquely glorify the Holocaust and denigrate the memory of the six million. But while we focus intently on ensuring awareness of the tragedy of the past we are losing sight of a tragedy in our midst: Many Holocaust survivors are living their final days in poverty. According to the Jewish Federations of North America, more than half of the 127,000 Holocaust survivors living in the United States fall beneath 200 percent of the federal poverty threshold, meaning they live on less than $21,660 per year. Holocaust survivors are five times more likely to be living below the poverty line than the general senior population. In Los Angeles, one in six survivors requires community assistance. In the past year, the LA Jewish Federation has seen the number of survivors needing emergency assistance for basic housing, food, medical, dental and transportation needs rise by 20 percent. The vast majority of these survivors are now in their 80's and 90's and two-thirds of them live alone. Very few have any family support network, which is not surprising considering that so few had family that survived the war. As a result, many are forced into institutional care because they cannot afford to receive care in their homes. While institutionalized care settings are beneficial for many older adults, Holocaust survivors react poorly and can be prone to emotional suffering and physical deterioration from sights, sounds and routines that may resurrect Holocaust experiences. Research indicates that survivors, in particular, benefit tremendously from access to social service programs that allow them to age in place in their current residences. It is a solution that is both cost-effective and humane. As one of the original sponsors of the U.S. Administration on Aging grant program now known as the Community Innovations In Aging In Place, I am hopeful that we can find the resources to help these survivors in their time of need. I urge my colleagues to support H. Con. Res. 323 and I look forward to working with them to achieve its goal of ensuring that all Holocaust survivors in the United States are able to live with dignity, comfort, and security in their remaining years.

Mr. WAXMAN

Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve a point of order.

Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the motion to recommit.

Mr. WAXMAN. I object.

Mr. WAXMAN. I withdraw my point of order.

Mr. WAXMAN. This legislation is designed to provide health care services for the heroes of 9/11, the policemen and the firemen who didn't know what would be in store for them when they went into the World Trade Center. Many of them are suffering from the health consequences of their activities, and we have an obligation to provide the services that they need. What does this motion to recommit do? It would, first of all, reduce payments to health care providers, making it harder for those people to get access to hospitals to treat them. But the worst thing about this motion to recommit is that it strikes a pay-for that's been passed three times already in the House, and it eliminates areas of the health care reform law that are designed to save money and to prevent costly health problems. There are 248 organizations that have signed a letter opposing these kinds of cuts. This same kind of proposal was offered in the Senate and rejected very soundly. These are groups that are concerned that we have a health system that is there to protect the public health. Can you imagine the irony that the public health measures we're trying to put in place so that we can deal with chronic disease would be struck? They would wipe that out in order to pay for this bill. That is not the way to pay for this legislation. Groups such as the American Heart Association, the American Cancer Society, the American Diabetes Association, the American Lung Association, maternal and child health associations, and dozens of others all urge a ``no'' vote on this motion to recommit. Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Wiener), a very important member of our committee and a champion for this legislation.

Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. WAXMAN

Mr. WAXMAN. Madam Speaker, October 1 is the beginning of Breast Cancer Awareness Month. This is a moment to reflect on the great work done by scientists, physicians and nurses, patients, survivors, and their families every day to detect, treat, prevent and--one day--cure breast cancer. It is a time to recall the personal losses of so many family members and friends. And it is an occasion to measure the important progress made against breast cancer and the improvement in the chances of survival and in the quality of life for women and men with breast cancer. But, for the more than 200,000 American women diagnosed with breast cancer this year, and the 40,000 who will die from breast cancer, it is also time for us to renew our commitment in this struggle, to reaffirm that we will complete this work, meet unmet needs, and once and for all end the risk of breast cancer to our families and our children. This is a struggle that we willingly take on for our families, and for families around the world, where a woman dies from breast cancer every minute of every hour of every day. This year, 1.3 million women worldwide will be diagnosed with breast cancer, and of them a half million will die from breast cancer. As we mark Breast Cancer Awareness Month in the United States, we do so as members of a global community facing a common health threat. This year brings other important commemorative milestones in the fight against breast cancer. I learned recently that this year is the thirtieth anniversary of Nancy Brinker's promise to her sister, Susan G. Komen, to pursue a cure for breast cancer--a promise that helped spark vital patient advocacy worldwide in the race for a cure. This is the twentieth anniversary of the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program (NBCCEDP), administered by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). In 1990, Congress stepped in to give women access to early cancer detection. By passing this law, we sent the message that no woman should have to forgo life- saving tests because she can't afford them. More than 3 million American women have benefitted from this program. This is also the tenth anniversary of the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Prevention and Treatment Act, which expanded Medicaid coverage for American women diagnosed through the screening and early detection services supported by NBCCEDP. Today, this coverage is available in all fifty States. Last year, in passing comprehensive health care reform, we built on these early achievements by expanding health coverage and making preventive health care more accessible for all Americans. We did this because uninsured cancer patients are 60 percent more likely to die than privately insured patients within five years of diagnosis. We did this because of the tens of millions of uninsured Americans who deserve screening, treatment and care--but do not receive them today. We have important work that remains to be done. Only a fraction of the American women eligible to receive preventive health services under NBCCEDP do so. There are waiting lists at clinics, which mean women whose cancers could have been caught early and treated instead find out when their disease has progressed and spread. There are new screening technologies to be developed, new treatments and hopefully cures that await discovery. Madam Speaker, I hope that every American family takes a moment during October to reflect on the progress we've made against breast cancer and to commit to taking steps to protect their health or to contribute in some way to creating and achieving a world without breast cancer.

Mr. WAXMAN

Mr. WAXMAN. Madam Speaker, thoughtful stewardship of our national budget and accountability in government should be a top national priority. Toward that end, in the 111th Congress, the Committee on Energy and Commerce has been vigilant in conducting oversight hearings to identify waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanagement in government, and this effort has informed the development of a number of legislative initiatives that would produce substantial deficit reduction. Pursuant to the instructions in H. Res. 1493, following is a discussion of major Committee initiatives in this area. One of the main areas of the Committee's focus has been promoting efficiency and effectiveness in our nation's health care system. The Affordable Care Act, which the President signed into law earlier this year, contains reforms that will save the taxpayers $130 billion over the next ten years and $1.2 trillion over the following decade. This legislation contains many important provisions to reduce waste, fraud, and abuse in the health care system. These include new tools to identify fraudulent providers and prevent them from enrolling in Medicare and Medicaid; new and stronger penalties for providers that defraud Medicare and Medicaid; new data-sharing and data-reporting requirements to identify waste, fraud, and abuse; and new funding to identify, prevent, and prosecute fraudulent Medicare and Medicaid providers. The Committee has been reviewing additional cost-cutting initiatives involving health coverage. One concerns drug manufacturer rebates under the Medicare Part D program. The costs of drugs for Medicare-Medicaid dual eligible enrollees (which are paid almost entirely by the federal government) should be no higher under Medicare Part D than they are under Medicaid. The Committee-passed version of health reform included such a rebate provision. A version of this provision that passed the House (but was not enacted into law as part of the Affordable Care Act) would have saved taxpayers approximately $115 billion over ten years. Significant taxpayer savings for the federal government would also result by prohibiting ``pay for delay'' agreements between brand-name drug manufacturers and generic drug manufacturers under which the generic companies are paid to delay the marketing of generic products. Each year, the government spends billions of dollars on prescription drugs through programs such as Medicare and Medicaid, and the inflated drug costs that result from artificially delayed entry of generics onto the market mean higher costs for the government. The Committee and the House approved health reform legislation that included such a prohibition, but this language was not included in the version of the bill that became law. Energy policy provides another potential for significant savings. Last year, the House passed comprehensive energy legislation that would have saved the taxpayers $9 billion over ten years. This legislation has not yet been considered by the Senate. Other areas the Committee is examining also provide avenues for savings. In the telecommunications area, efforts to improve spectrum management and identify opportunities for spectrum reallocation and auction could save taxpayers billions of dollars. Further, the universal service fund costs consumers approximately $8 billion per year. Under the leadership of Subcommittee Chairman Rick Boucher, the Committee has been examining ways to make this fund more efficient and control costs. The Committee will continue its broad-ranging efforts to consider these and other approaches to address waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanagement in government and reduce the federal deficit.

Mr. WAXMAN

Mr. WAXMAN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself 1 minute. I rise in strong support of this bill for education, jobs and Medicaid assistance. This will provide critical relief for the States and local governments. This is a vote for jobs, for education, for health care. The States and local governments are faced with a decrease in income or taxes as people have lost their jobs, and yet in the Medicaid area there is an increase for services, as some people have lost their insurance. This will help the States avoid the massive cuts in Medicaid eligibility payments and payments to providers. The Federal Medicaid Assistance Program was adopted in February of 2009. It expires in December. This will extend that temporary FMAP program for an additional 6 months through June 30, 2011, when most State fiscal years end. There would be no change in the current formula for targeting additional fiscal relief at States with high unemployment rates. I urge support for this legislation. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. WAXMAN. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield such time as he may consume to the chairman of the Health Subcommittee of the Energy and Commerce Committee, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone).

Mr. WAXMAN. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Baldwin).

Mr. WAXMAN. I continue to reserve my time.

Mr. WAXMAN. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gene Green).

Mr. WAXMAN. Madam Speaker, let the American people know that we are trying to help kids get educated, and make sure that those who are vulnerable get health care; while the Republicans are urging that we continue the tax cuts for people making more than $300,000 a year. That to me is a distortion of priorities. I am pleased now to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Engel).

Mr. WAXMAN. Madam Speaker, this is assistance to the States for Medicaid. No State has 300 percent of poverty for Medicaid. That's just not the way the States run it. We're talking about the poorest of the poor to get Medicaid assistance. There may be additional people who can get it for children under the CHIP program but not under Medicaid. The States can't afford Medicaid, and we're going to help them by directing Federal dollars so that those very poor people can get health care, and this legislation assists the States in paying for teachers and first responders. What can be more important? It isn't one State versus another. All throughout this country we've got to make sure that we have an educated population and a chance for health care for those who need it who cannot afford it. That's why this bill is important. It will also provide jobs that will otherwise be lost if the States do not receive these funds. Put that into perspective of the Republican call for tax cuts to be continued without paying for them for people that make over $300,000 a year. Who deserves our help? Let's help the vulnerable. Let's help the next generation. Let's provide the funds that are in this legislation for health care, for first responders, for teachers. I urge support for the legislation. I yield back the balance of my time.