Brad Wenstrup

Mr. WENSTRUP

Mr. WENSTRUP. I thank the gentleman from Arkansas. At this time, I would like to recognized the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Young). Mr. Young is a graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy. He was a rifle platoon commander as well as an intelligence officer, serving a decade in the military as a Marine Corps captain.

Mr. WENSTRUP. Mr. Speaker, tonight we are here 2 weeks before Veterans Day to take some time to pay tribute to so many of our outstanding veterans and for the great things that they have done. Arthur Ashe, a world-class tennis player, a hero to many, was once asked about heroism. He said: True heroism is remarkably sober, very undramatic. It is not the urge to surpass all others at whatever cost, but the urge to serve others at whatever cost. This describes our veterans so well--serving others at whatever cost. Tonight, we give credit where credit is due. In honor of Veterans Day, we willingly say thank you, thank you to the 1 percent. Only 1 percent of Americans have worn the uniform. Over that time, they have produced exceptional results on behalf of freedom time and time again. Army Chaplain Father Tim Vakoc was hit by an IED in Mosul, Iraq, in May of 2004. He suffered severe head wounds from the explosion and from shrapnel. He came home, but over time he succumbed to these wounds. The troops often asked Father Vakoc, Why did you go out so often with us when you could have stayed back on the base where it was safer? But, no, you came out with us into the fight, into the combat. He was quoted as saying: The safest place for me to be is in the center of God's will; and if that is in the line of fire, then that is where I will be. As I served as a surgeon in Iraq, it was part of my job to talk to troops whose comrade just was being taken back to the operating room, to talk to them before and after surgery when they were wounded. There are things you never forget from that. I will never forget going into a room full of marines to tell them about the condition of their buddy before we operated, and sitting in that room hunched over was a marine praying his rosary. I will never forget how I felt when I went back an hour later to have to tell them that he didn't make it. They fight for their country, but they die for each other. Tonight, we are honored to have several Members here, Members that very served, to tell their stories, to tell their stories about a hero that they have served with, to let America know about these great people, and to pay respect to our veterans. At this time, I yield to the gentleman from Arkansas, Lieutenant Colonel Tim Griffin, who is a colonel in the United States Army Reserve JAG Corps. He served in Iraq in 2006. He had been assigned to the Southeast Medical Area Readiness Support Group as a command judge advocate. When he went to Iraq, he was assigned to the 101st Airborne Division.

Mr. WENSTRUP

Mr. WENSTRUP. Mr. Speaker, during World War II, man, woman, young, old, rich, poor, everyone in this Nation pulled together to bring our country through a difficult time. It was a bipartisan effort, for sure. After the war, we cut spending and we were a Nation that went to work. But I ask my colleagues today, as we continue to increase our spending and run up our debt: What is the limit? At what point do you finally say it is dangerous, it is dangerous for the future of America? Is there a limit? We can't keep going in this direction. No one in this body wants America to default--that is not good for this country--but we need to be serious about what we plan for the future of this country. People are always saying, ``Do it for the kids; do it for the kids.'' We do a lot for kids, and we can always do more for kids, but what about when those kids today are grown up and they are stuck with all this debt? What are we doing to them? The Temptations, in the 1970s, had a song that said: Papa was a rolling stone. And when he died, all he left us was ``a loan.'' It was not a compliment. And if it was irresponsible in the 1970s, it is irresponsible today. I spoke earlier about the Greatest Generation and the legacy they left. What is going to be our legacy? A legacy of nothing but debt? Can you imagine the potential for opportunity in this country, for investment and for jobs, if we are serious and we are on a solvent course for the United States of America? And the sooner we go in that direction, the more we can do to help Americans that are in need. It is about stability. It is about certainty for the United States of America.

Mr. WENSTRUP

Mr. WENSTRUP. Mr. Speaker, Ernie Blankenship lived a life of service to his faith, his family, his country, and his community. It was a pleasure to help Ernie and Rita celebrate their 50th anniversary last year, as it was to see him on Sunday mornings at St. Mary Church. Ernie passed away earlier this week--a loss that will be felt not only by his family but throughout southern Ohio. Ernie served his country in the Army, played minor league baseball, and earned degrees from the University of Cincinnati and Xavier University. He coached youth sports teams and enjoyed a broadcasting career that spanned over 50 years. Earlier this year, Ernie retired as the senior vice president of NCB Savings Bank in Hillsboro. He touched all of our lives in countless ways. He will continue to touch our lives and the lives of so many young men and women through the scholarship that bears his name. Ernie Blankenship's legacy will continue through his children and grandchildren, who learned firsthand his lessons on a life of humble service, faith, and patriotism. It has been a true honor to know Ernie and to represent him in Congress.

Mr. WENSTRUP

Mr. WENSTRUP. I thank the gentlelady for yielding. This slowdown, shutdown has taken on many particular angles and a lot of accusation and a lot of discussion; but as we get to this point, although ObamaCare isn't driving the shutdown, it isn't merely about the millions who will still be uninsured, and its not merely about the 50 percent or more of this country who will be on Medicaid where access to care is extremely limited, and it's not only about rates going up. It is about that health care is going backwards in America, not forward. The government shutdown is not only about the fact that in Ohio we passed a constitutional amendment that made the mandate in Ohio, only to be overturned by the Supreme Court. Sixty-six percent of the people in Ohio did not want this law, and I'm from Ohio and I'm here to continue to fight for that. I'm bothered as we go through this and I hear the arguments and I hear people referred to ``terrorism,'' ``jihad'' and ``bombs strapped to their chest.'' Well, as someone who served in Iraq as a combat surgeon during the bloodiest time of the war, 2005-2006, I guarantee you what's taking place here is not that, and it's shameful when people use those types of references. And I bet those who have served in war understand that's not appropriate. We are here to negotiate, we're here to discuss, and we're here to represent the American people. Really, I thought when I came here, I'm new, I'm a freshman--I thought that fair treatment for all Americans would be something that's common ground for all of us. I thought that having special subsidies for Members of Congress would be something that we would all disagree with, and that would be another area of common ground. Those are the basic premises that are driving this shutdown right now, because we have passed continuing resolutions that would fund the government completely if we would just sit down and agree that these portions of this law are wrong and they go against what we as Americans believe in, that we're to be treated fairly, that there is no special premise for one group over the other. I thought those would be areas of common ground, and I'm surprised that this still goes on. We'll continue to fight over things we disagree with within ObamaCare and try to improve our health care system as we go along; but it interests me when people say it's the law, get over it. Well, it's not the law that was passed when you're changing things, and that's the problem. I wonder sometimes if the Presidential election was different. Say, for example, Mitt Romney had won and he went into the Presidency and said, I'm going to exempt this group and I'm going to exempt that group. I'm going to change the law and provide a subsidy for those it's not written into the law for. What would the outcry be? The outcry would come from me because I believe in the rule of law, and I believe in fairness under the law. We need to sit down and figure this out. The President is the President, and he has the seat at the head of the table; but he was not the only one elected. We've all been elected to represent the people, and we all have a seat at the table, and that's what needs to take place. I hear arguments from the other side talking about while we're passing these resolutions, you're picking and choosing now. That's exactly what ObamaCare has done. Throughout that law, there is picking and choosing. So when I hear the other side say we're picking and choosing, I say thank you for making our argument because that's what we're having problems with. I pray for a better day. And Lord willing, we'll all sit down at the table and get these things figured out on behalf of the American people. That's what we were sent here to do, and I hope we can get that done, and I urge those who will not come forward to think about it and to come forward and sit and talk with us. With that, I appreciate the gentlelady putting this Special Order together for us to have a chance to discuss these issues.

Mr. WENSTRUP

Mr. WENSTRUP. Mr. Speaker, we have heard much debate over the last week, arguments and accusations being made from both sides. I have heard references to being terrorists, to jihad, and to having bombs strapped to our chests. Mr. Speaker, I spent 1 year, 2005-2006, perhaps the bloodiest time of the war, as an Army combat surgeon in Iraq. In this Chamber I have seen no terrorists, no jihad, nor any bombs strapped to chests. And if you have been to war, you would not use such rhetoric here. Mr. Speaker, colleagues, we have engaged in so much debate concerning the Affordable Care Act. We have addressed it from every angle, the affordability, the methods of implementation, those that may benefit and those that will not. I have contended that as a Nation we should have focused on who is uncared for in our Nation and how we provide care. Addressing the uninsured would certainly fall under this framework. And I have contended that a form, a mere piece of paper that says you have insurance or a plan, does not mean that you have access to care, nor does it mean that you have coverage for treatment. Many from one side of the aisle have said, ``You lost the election, get over it.'' Indeed, the Republicans lost the Presidential election. And I am over it. However, all of us in this body won elections. Each of us was elected to serve the American people as well. And while the President has a seat at the head of the table, he does not have the only seat at the table. And we all need to take our seats at the table. I look forward, not backward, except to learn from history. I am over the Presidential election. What I am not over is what we are becoming. What we are becoming is of great concern to me, as much concern to me as the Affordable Care Act itself. I have a concern about who we are, and what we consider to be right, and what we think is wrong. And I hope that everyone has taken the opportunity to look at our past. Our glorious history is all around us. As you look around and you review our great history, you see the legacies left from previous generations. What is our legacy? What will this generation, this Congress leave behind? Will it be that we have a disregard for the law, a disregard for laws that we voted on and signed? Waivers, exemptions, special subsidies, all of which show a disregard for applying laws equally, as well as a disregard for the rule of law. Applying laws equally, the rule of law, the very ideals that Americans have proudly touted for over two centuries. Are we deciding to abandon these core values? Is this the way we want to carve out our chapter in American history? The history of a great Nation? A Nation that was formed to be of the people, by the people, and for the people. This concept and the freedom that comes with it requires a level of responsibility in order to sustain it. Pope John Paul II, when visiting America in 1995, spoke of the freedom that we enjoy and the responsibility that comes with it. And he summed it up by saying, ``Freedom consists not in doing what we like, but in having the right to do what we ought.'' I pray that the rule of law, and equality for all Americans, our fundamental principles that are etched in all of our hearts, with the foundation of these principles and the civility that accompanies such, we are obligated to come together to find common ground and to talk to one another. And, Lord willing, we will.

Mr. WENSTRUP

Mr. WENSTRUP. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1961, which would allow America's iconic wooden paddle-wheel steamboat, the Delta Queen, to return to traveling America's rivers. For over 60 years, the Delta Queen has traveled up and down America's waterways, carrying passengers, entertaining Presidents and foreign dignitaries, and even serving our troops in times of war. She's a true American treasure. However, due to Federal safety regulations implemented in the 1960s, wooden ships were banned from carrying 50 or more passengers overnight. While this regulation was originally intended for oceangoing cruise ships, the Delta Queen, due to her size and structure, is a riverboat that is unfairly trapped by this regulation, even though she is never more than a mile from shore. Understanding the unique situation of the Delta Queen, and the fact that she was built and safely operating before this law was put in place, Congress has granted her exemptions for the past 40 years from this regulation, allowing the steamboat to continue to safely carry passengers along America's waterways. However, since 2008, Congress has failed to continue the Delta Queen exemption. As a result, the Delta Queen is currently moored in Tennessee and is unable to fully provide the experiences and services that she was built for. Today, the Delta Queen is under new management and continues to undergo rigorous safety inspections and tests administered by the Coast Guard. She has operated safely for over 80 years. Like many of my constituents, I have fond memories of the Delta Queen, which has called Cincinnati her home for 37 years. With the passage of H.R. 1961, we can return this historic landmark back to Cincinnati, preserving America's cultural heritage, and bringing jobs and economic growth to the greater Cincinnati area. I commend my colleague, Steve Chabot, for taking the lead on this issue for Cincinnati, and I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 1961.

Mr. WENSTRUP

Mr. WENSTRUP. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the heroic efforts of Specialist Fourth Class Gary George Wetzel of the United States Army. Specialist Fourth Class Wetzel served in the 173rd Assault Helicopter Company and was awarded the Medal of Honor for his extreme heroism in action in Vietnam on January 8, 1968. While going to the aid of his aircraft commander, Specialist Fourth Class Wetzel became critically wounded. Although his left arm was severed, Specialist Fourth Class Wetzel held his position and engaged the enemy. After eliminating three, he refused treatment and attempted to assist his aircraft commander. Due to the severity of his wounds, Specialist Fourth Class Wetzel lost consciousness. Once he regained consciousness, he persisted in his efforts to drag himself to the aid of his fellow crewman and assisted in bringing the commander to safety. Because of his valiant efforts towards his fellow crewmen, I am proud to honor and remember the actions of Specialist Fourth Class Gary George Wetzel.

Mr. WENSTRUP

Mr. WENSTRUP. Mr. Speaker, we are at a point where an unannounced, unplanned, and largely unconstitutional fourth branch of government has taken root. Dominated by unelected bureaucrats, these Federal departments and agencies are churning out rules and regulations at an unprecedented pace. According to one study, Federal agencies finalized nearly 3,000 rules and over 60 major regulations in 2007. That same year, Congress enacted 138 public laws. To this end, one of the first bills I cosponsored upon being sworn in as a Member of Congress was the REINS Act, H.R. 367, and I'm pleased to have voted for it today. The bill increases accountability and creates transparency in the Federal regulatory process by requiring Congress to approve all new major regulations. With the REINS Act, no longer will bureaucrats in the fourth branch go unchecked, and the constitutional balance our Founders deliberately drafted would be restored. I will continue to fight for a government that is smaller, more efficient, more streamlined, and more responsive to hardworking taxpayers.

Mr. WENSTRUP

Mr. WENSTRUP. I thank the gentleman from Texas for yielding. Mr. Chairman, as a cosponsor, I rise in support of this important amendment to protect and promote job creation in both southern Ohio, where I'm from, and for this entire country. Business owners and entrepreneurs currently live and work under an executive branch hostile to the free enterprise system and a President whose governing philosophy has been: You didn't build that. Agencies like the EPA, Health and Human Services, and the Department of Education hand down new regulations with little regard for the real- world impacts. These bureaucrats do not care if jobs are lost, as long as their rules are enforced. This amendment requires an analysis of how many jobs would be added or lost due to new regulations brought forth under this or any future administrations. This amendment also requires the distinction as to whether the jobs affected are government or private sector jobs. This amendment further protects real-world businesses from bureaucrats who are often punitive rather than constructive and are often far removed from everyday economic realities. I stand in support of this amendment.

Mr. WENSTRUP

Mr. WENSTRUP. Mr. Speaker, the unilateral decision by this administration to delay certain provisions of Federal legislation undermines the very rule of law. If President Obama can pick and choose what he wants to enforce within ObamaCare, what prevents him from doing the same with other legislation? That is my concern. And while this administration is determined that their signature piece of legislation is too complicated for businesses, the individual mandate still stands. Businesses get a break, but individuals get no relief from the burdens of this law. Why do hardworking individuals not deserve relief from the hardships of the Affordable Care Act? If the President and his allies in Congress stand by their decision to delay one mandate, is it not fair to delay the other? Realistically, a permanent delay through the full repeal of ObamaCare and its mandates is the only workable solution. Don't Americans deserve equality under the law and fairness for all?

Mr. WENSTRUP

Mr. WENSTRUP. Mr. Speaker, every coin and bill we use bears the phrase ``In God We Trust.'' Sadly, today, our trust tends to stop there. I don't recall hearing ``In Government We Trust'' very often. President Reagan governed on the phrase ``Trust, but verify.'' This holds true to the Founders' original plan of three branches of government working to safeguard the people from overreach or abuse of power by any one. Current scandals fly in the face of the very principles and ethos we live our lives by and the values we were founded upon. I can tell you that we in southern and southwest Ohio take pride not only in hard work but honest work. We now face an executive branch so vast that those who are in charge now claim that full accountability is impossible. They claim that government is too vast to be held accountable. Mr. Speaker, I will not give up on the goodness of the American citizen and the possibility of responsibility and trust that we should be able to have in our government.

Mr. WENSTRUP

Mr. WENSTRUP. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment. This funding, which supports our Nation's domestic uranium enrichment capabilities, is vital for our national security and our energy security and independence. The RD&D program, located in the American Centrifuge Plant in Piketon, Ohio, is the cornerstone for a domestic source of enriched uranium. American Centrifuge is necessary to support our national defense program needs, including supporting tritium production requirements for the U.S. nuclear stockpile. USEC has received no bailouts. It is inaccurate and misleading to use this politically-charged term in connection with an important national and energy security technology. I strongly believe that American Centrifuge is too important to our Nation's national and energy security to abandon now. It is vital that the United States maintain a domestic technology to provide enriched uranium for national security purposes. We must have a U.S.-owned domestic supply of enriched uranium. With the closure of the 1950s-era Paducah enrichment plant, American Centrifuge is the only available technology to meet the Nation's future national security needs for enriched uranium. Thankfully, we don't have to rely on foreign sources. The RD&D program is within budget and on schedule for completion by December 2013. This funding is not an earmark, as it was included in the budget request and there is no direct funding in the bill for the project. The provision simply provides the authority to transfer existing funds from other DOE programs. The Burgess amendment would remove the final piece of funding needed to complete the RD&D program, shutting down operations and essentially wasting the $200 million that has already been spent. I urge you to support domestic uranium enrichment technology and oppose this amendment. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. WENSTRUP. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. WENSTRUP

Mr. WENSTRUP. Madam Speaker, I stand before you today to tell you about a rare disorder known as CDKL5. Today, June 17, is CDKL5 Awareness Day. This genetic disorder was discovered by genetic markers in 2004. Those impacted usually suffer from seizures and rarely, if ever, walk or talk. My niece, Catie, is one of only 600 known cases in the world. When Catie was born just 5 years ago, only 200 children had been diagnosed with CDKL5 disorder. Due to the recent discovery of this condition, and its resemblance to Rett Syndrome, epilepsy and autism, it's likely that there are many children who have been undiagnosed or misdiagnosed. Families are forced to turn to the Internet and the community of parents because even doctors know relatively little about CDKL5. Unfortunately, at this time there's no cure, only hours of therapy, and for many, traveling long distances to specialists. Fortunately, CDKL5 research is taking place. The children impacted with CDKL5 disorder cannot talk to you about their condition, so the responsibility falls to us to raise awareness. My family learns something from Catie every day. It's my hope that we can continue to learn more for Catie and the other young people impacted by CDKL5 disorder.

Mr. WENSTRUP

Mr. WENSTRUP. Mr. Chairman, the Guantanamo Bay detention facility was established to hold unlawful enemy combatants captured during the war on terror. Any proposal to close the Guantanamo detention facility must first clearly address the transfer of remaining prisoners detained there. Many of the remaining detainees are the most hardened terrorists, including those responsible for the 9/11 mass murders of many Americans. There are three primary options: transfer to another country or transfer to the United States or stay put. Transferring these terrorists to another country comes with a substantial risk of reengaging as an American threat. The current reengagement rate of former Guantanamo detainees is nearly 28 percent. I served for 1 year in Iraq with the Army as a medical officer at one of the largest detention facilities there. Often after prison release deals made by entrusted decisionmakers, we saw the same people return for new offenses. Additionally, there were multiple escapes and attempted escapes, as well as attacks trying to free the detainees. I've been to Guantanamo, and the facilities there are a safe and secure location away from our soldiers on the battlefield. I don't think there are many people in Cuba that are trying to free the people that are held at Guantanamo, and this was not the case in Iraq, and it may not be the case should they be transferred to the United States. I believe the prisoners at Guantanamo Bay are being treated appropriately and in a way that we can be proud of as a Nation. The hunger strike policy is carried out humanely with the detainees treated as patients. The access to caregivers and medical facilities is the same for our troops as it is for those detained. Additionally, transfers to the United States would be very expensive. We've already built a courtroom there that cost us in the millions of dollars. These terrorist detainees pose a very real danger to our security in America. They mean us real harm. The President has the ability to certify transfers of detainees to other countries, but he has yet to do so. And until the President leads with a better solution, I firmly believe that keeping Guantanamo open is our best option, our safest option, and our most logical option.

Mr. WENSTRUP

Mr. WENSTRUP. Mr. Speaker, I had the good fortune of getting to know Ben Gettler during years of pickup basketball games with him. Ben's philosophy about basketball wasn't too different from his philosophy about life: age is no reason to slow down. Ben was still running a business and two charitable foundations up to his final days with us. He passed away on June 4 at age 87. Ben grew up during a tumultuous time in our world's history. The experiences of his era imprinted upon him the importance of his heritage and shaped his philanthropic pursuits. As the president of the Jewish Foundation of Cincinnati, Ben organized a program that helped more young men and women per capita to travel to Israel than any other city in North America. Ben also gave back to his alma mater, the University of Cincinnati, by serving as the chairman of the board of trustees. Today, Gettler Stadium at the university stands as a tribute to Ben and his wife Dee's service to the University, as well as a reminder of his time in college as an outstanding track-and-field athlete. A grateful city thanks Ben's wife, Dee, and his children for sharing this energetic and passionate man with our community. The city of Cincinnati is truly a better place because of Ben Gettler. He will be missed, but he will never be forgotten.

Mr. WENSTRUP

Mr. WENSTRUP. Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 45 to repeal ObamaCare. Madam Speaker, as a physician, I know our health care system is broken, but this form of Washington meddling only makes it worse. The President's law puts too much control in the hands of the Federal Government, creating a complex system that emphasizes government intrusion over actual patient care. There is no reason for the IRS to play a role in our health care system, favoring one and punishing another. Medical decisions already cause deep anxiety in the lives of too many Americans. Why compound that with the weight of an audit? Our goal should be simple: respect you as a patient and connect you to the doctor that you deserve. Patient-centered solutions place you, the patient, at the center of our health care system, simplifying your life, not pushing you to the corner of Big Government sprawl. Madam Speaker, the American people deserve full repeal.

Mr. WENSTRUP

Mr. WENSTRUP. Just in closing, I would just like to reiterate the importance of decisions being able to be made between a doctor and a patient, because that's what we expect, and that's what Americans deserve in their health care system.

Mr. WENSTRUP. I thank the gentleman for yielding. I would like to take a little time to discuss a portion of the Affordable Care Act known as the Independent Payment Advisory Board. As you look at this chart, it's one of the agencies that has been developed here on this chart. I'd also like to point out on this chart that right down here is the physician, and over here is the patient. It seems to me that all we're really trying to do is get the patient to the physician. It behooves me to be able to explain why we need all this in between when we are just trying to get a patient to the physician. I would also like to point out that I think at the center of our health care in America should be the patient, not the Secretary of Health and Human Services. But let's talk for a minute about the Independent Payment Advisory Board. Who are they? Who are these people? Well, they're actually 15 unelected bureaucrats appointed by the President. To date, as this law is being enacted, no one has been appointed yet. What do they do? Well, they limit options. They limit care options. They limit access to care. They drive a wedge between the doctor and the patient, and they're responsible for denials of payment for certain types of treatment. I contend to you that really this is a wedge that we cannot afford if we are to have the best health care in the world, which we have been known to have. I would like to share with you a little story that I experienced in my 26 years as a doctor, as a surgeon. I had a patient who came in one time, and she explained to me that she's had a problem for 10 years. For 10 years she's had a problem, and she's had multiple treatments. She explained to me what those were. Between cortisone shots and physical therapy, she's had previous X-rays, she had paddings and strappings, different things that might put the painful area to rest and make it better, but none of it got better. They were all acceptable treatments, but for 10 years, they failed. So I said, Well, your X-ray looks normal. Have you ever had an MRI? She said, No. So I said, I don't want to repeat all the things that have failed. Let's go ahead and get an MRI and take a look inside. Well, later that afternoon, I get a call from the insurance company where I have to speak to a doctor about ordering this MRI. The doctor says to me, Why are you ordering the MRI? I explained it. And he said, Well, you've only seen her one time, so I'm not going to allow it. I'm not going to allow this to be ordered. I said, Well, maybe I've only seen her one time, Doctor, but you haven't seen her at all. You've never seen her. And I said, And you haven't taken the 10-year history that I have taken, and yet you're going to be deciding the care? I said, How can I get this patient to come and see you? The doctor said, Well, you can't do that. I said, Well, what's your specialty? He said, I'm an emergency room doctor. I said, Okay, fair enough. You would probably, in the emergency room then, refer her to a specialist, which is where she is today, and yet you, in your specialty, are denying this care. I went back and I explained this to the patient. But not until I said to the doctor, I said, I hope this call is being monitored for quality assurance because I want someone to hear what you said to me today. I went back to the patient and I said, You need to talk to your person at your work, your H.R. person, explain to them that you are being denied care and have them make a call to the insurance company. Do you know, the next day we got approval for that MRI. I was able to look inside, find out what was wrong and treat this patient, and within 3 weeks, she was better. But the advice from the person who had never seen the patient was, You can't have that MRI. This is what we are dealing with today. At least in this situation we had the opportunity to have her work call the insurance company and make a case saying, You need to take care of this patient. But imagine when it is a government agency. What kind of recourse do you think that we will have between the doctors and our patients? At least in this case it was a doctor. The Independent Payment Advisory Board will not be made up entirely of doctors, and they will not have people on there from every specialty with knowledge about everything that comes across medically. So do we want a third party deciding who gets care? Frankly, I don't think anyone should have the ability to determine someone's care unless they have looked the patient in the eye, they have looked and they've discussed the options, and the patient and the doctor decide together. This is a dangerous course that we're on in America and in Americans' health care.

Mr. WENSTRUP

Mr. WENSTRUP. Mr. Speaker, I stand before you today with great sadness. This weekend, the movement on behalf of life lost a passionate leader, Barbara Willke. For over four decades, Barbara and her husband, Dr. John Willke, were an unstoppable force for life. They joined together to author books, craft teaching materials, and give lectures in 64 countries, all to promote faith and sanctity of life. In 1971, they founded Right to Life of Greater Cincinnati, one of the first organizations of its kind. This life-loving organization continues to thrive in no small part due to their efforts over the years. In addition to being a pioneer of the pro-life movement, Barbara was a nurse, a mother, a foster parent, a grandmother, and devoted wife. She and John would have celebrated their 65th wedding anniversary this summer. Barbara's influence lives on through the lives she touched, especially those she protected. It's my honor to be one of the many people who will keep her legacy alive by defending our most vulnerable, the unborn, as she did for so many years. God bless Barbara Willke, and may she rest in peace.

Mr. WENSTRUP

Mr. WENSTRUP. It's that time of year again. Folks back in my district and all across America have had to part ways with our hard-earned money as we send our taxes off to Washington. How long did it take you just to figure out the complicated tax forms and get everything together just to file your returns? It takes the average American 13 hours. Not the best use of your time, is it? But, then, it's not hard to imagine when you consider that our Tax Code contains over 70,000 pages of regulations. That's not the tax system that our fellow Americans deserve. We need a Tax Code that is fairer and simpler for everyone--families, students, business owners, and all hardworking taxpayers. That's the kind of comprehensive tax reform that the House Republicans want to enact.

Mr. WENSTRUP

Mr. WENSTRUP. Mr. Speaker, in 2008, at 92 years old, Major Tom Griffin stood up at a Veterans Day event in Cincinnati, and he told his story as one of the Doolittle's Raiders that attacked Tokyo after the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor. Managing to bail out after the attack and making his way to China, Tom returned to the U.S., deployed once again, this time to Europe, and was a POW for almost 2 years. Tom Griffin never said, why me; but, rather, why not me? Growing up in the Depression, Tom Griffin learned to put service above himself. Over the years, I saw Tom tend to other veterans as they aged, and he was there for their final separation from service on Earth. Tom Griffin has completed his Earthly mission. However, the positive effects of his work will never perish. But are we worth the sacrifice made by Tom Griffin and so many others? Will history show that we treasured the gift of freedom that he handed us? We all need to commit to ensure that Tom Griffin's efforts on behalf of freedom will not have been in vain. May he be able to look down at us and say, well done. Tom Griffin, you led a good life. You were a good man and the greatest of Americans. Thank you, and God bless you, Tom Griffin.