vote, just watch. see you. >> a live look inside the house rules committee, california democrat henry waxman, the rules committee is meeting this morning to consider changes to the health care reconciliation bill. this is one of two health care bills the house will consider tomorrow. one passed by the senate in december and the second, the reconciliation bill which makes changes to the senate bill. the second one change is a student loan program. the rules committee will sent parameters for debate tomorrow when the bills go to the full

house. house is in session today too. the committee will also consider possible amendments. the reconciliation procedure is being used as a way to avoid a senate filibuster and it requires a simple majority rather than 60 votes but provisions must be specific budget requirements. if the senate health care bill passes the house tomorrow it will then go to the president and the companion reconciliation bill which changes the senate bill will go to the senate for possible consideration next week. from capitol hill, you are watching c-span live coverage. ..

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] good morning now, the firm will please come to order. >> madam chair, you don't have order. >> we're here today to consider h.r. 4872 reconciliation act of 2010. and happy to welcome the distinguished committee mr. waxman and the committee's ranking member of mr. barton. gentleman, please come board.

we are going to do it all it wants and the distinguished chairman of the ways and means committee. i want all of you up there. [inaudible conversations] >> is mr. levin hear? >> [inaudible conversations] >> good morning. [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] good morning gentleman, we're pleased to have such a distinguished group of guests with us this morning and we're going to start with -- we will with the chairman of energy and commerce. according to mr. waxman if you will begin and mr. waxman has always we will accept your whole salmon into the record and you may summarize if you choose. >> thank you very much madam chairman pierre the and members of the rules committee barrett >> can we clear the room so we can get started? >> we are on the verge of taking a decisive step to provide access for all americans to affordable quality health care. health insurance today is failing our families and our businesses. if we do not think the system will go bankrupt, premiums will keep skyrocketing, benefits will

keep getting slashed, and what you get will cost you much much more in our country's expenditures on health care will continue to grow unchecked. today americans with health insurance know they are just one serious illness away from debt, losing their home, and bankruptcy. with this legislation will provide american security that they will always be able to afford a and access health care for themselves and their families. first and foremost this package of measures provides health insurance security for all americans. it builds on the system that we have, what works, and the reforms would does not work. you can keep your doctor and your health care providers. you lose your job you will not lose access to healthcare and if you have a pre-existing medical condition you will not be denied health insurance were charged

more for that insurance. health reform provide significant benefits that will be delivered shortly after enactment and able to be used by the american people in this calendar year. for example, seniors will see immediately with their medicare prescription drug costs a $250 rebate, insurance companies will not able to cancel your insurance when you get sick, and parents will have the option of keeping their children up to the age of 26 on their insurance policies. when ray floyd implement this reform, we bring 32 million americans who are now uninsured into the health insurance system. this expansion is not only equitable, it enables the substantial insurance reforms that are needed to stop the abuses and discrimination currently in the insurance market. in addition even within the strict limits of the reconciliation rules, we have taken strong and effective

action to improve the senate bill to make its provisions more attractive, more equitable, more progressive and more consistent with the overarching goal is of insuring affordable access to quality health insurance. the principal improvements we have made under our committee's jurisdiction include closing the gap in medicare prescription drug coverage by 2020 including rebates this year to eligible seniors and eliminating special medicaid deal for nebraska and increasing federal matching rates to all states for the cost of services to newly eligible individuals forgetting 2014. improving ed mcmahon tecate payments to states that now cover low income chambliss adults so there are treated equitably increasing medicaid payment rates for primary-care physicians so the new medicaid beneficiaries will have access to primary care. ritter investments into

community health centers, referring medicare advantage and ensuring medicare sustainability and strengthening medicare services. health reform is not only a moral imperative, it's an economic one. it will reduce the deficit by more than a trillion dollars over the next two decades. i look forward to the deliberation of this committee and to your approval of a role and the house approval tomorrow of the most important health legislation since medicare and the most important package of domestic legislation since social security in 1935. thank you very much. >> thank you, mr. burton. >> is this on? thank you, madam chairman and members of the distinguished rules committee. i've been in congress 26 years. the only member of the bias that has been here at the blogger

than me is mr. dreyer, i think i have ever been else out right, i don't have mr. miller, mr. levin, mr. waxman at the table. this is the most important domestic policy issue in my time in the congress. so i think it's a very serious serious meeting today and you're rules committee. i've got a statement that i'm putting in the record, but what i really want to emphasize is that i hope with ashburn you and your wisdom decide to do that she put of some sort of a role that is based on a regular order. i want everybody to understand if, in fact, the decision is made by your leadership to pass this whether it is called the sell-through executing or have the deem-and-pass reader going to have a vote or not have a vote on a bill that passed the senate on christmas eve, if it

comes to the house and if the rule is passed it is deemed that it is passed and there will be no vote, no debate on the substantive policy differences between house and the senate's. now i am told that on its own the bill that the senate passed would not pass the house because there's not a majority, there's not to assist you rose in your conference. to pass it. so we start off if that's the way you guys decide to do it, we start off with a deeming something passed that nobody in the house really gets it to debate or have an up or down vote on. and then we debate perfunctorily maybe an hour or two hours, i don't know how much time they're going to give us for debate, a reconciliation package. people who have really seen it in depth are those details member of the rules -- the budget committee.

and since 1983 which is the year before i got elected the senate is only one time accepted a reconciliation package that came out of the house first. so if the last 30 years are relevant, you're probably not going to get the senate to agree to the changes that have been made in reconciliation. and if that happens madam chairman, what you're going to have is the president is calling to sign a bill that the house never voted on up or down, the senate passed on christmas eve, and it makes revolutionary changes. in the way our health care system has year to four -- year 24 been used, been done. now, it doesn't have to be that way. you don't have to be a partisan republican or a partisan democratic toxd know that there are legitimate differences in that we need to try to alleviate

those differences. you know, the speaker of the house could appoint mr. waxman, mr. miller, mr. levin, whoever else on the majority side, mr. banner -- mr. boehner could appoint one-third of the republicans. we could go to conference with the senate and again you can freeze the republicans out if a majority of the democrats in the house and the senate can agree consign the same coverage reports you can then be billed back to the both bodies were upper down row. that's not easy, it's hard to do but it would work. this process corrupts and prostitutes the system. i can't -- i know all of you all personally and i respect you. i would not use such language if i didn't really believe it to. for we are about to unleash a cultural war in this country if

it for use this process and don't allow the legitimate differences to be debated and hopefully moderated in compromised. so my main point is don't do this deem-and-pass. i mean, officially i'm asking for an open rule. i know, that's not likely to happen but you could to a modified closed rule, you could make a republican substitute in order, you could make several amendments the most important amendments in order, we could have some sort of the debates are afternoon, and i might point out that as far as i can tell in both the senate bill and the reconciliation package the main components in terms of policy change don't kick in for 2014 so it's not like we have to be here on a sunday afternoon. it's not like we don't have enough time to actually have a debate. if you remember some of the debates on the tax reform act of 1986, i know mr. dreier was a part of that, mr. levin was

certainly a part of that, if you remember the debate on the war resolution under the first i racal for, we have extended debate and, in fact, lead to every member speak on the war resolution of the iraq gulf war. some madam speaker, i could go through the substance, but we have a number of amendments that myself and members of the energy and commerce committee are offering. i would hope at a minimum those who would be made in order to get some of the special deals that were put in for various states and localities. and i can't emphasize strongly enough for the sanctity of the institution we adopt rules that is based on a regular order, not sounds like a cancer fears that was never intended for things of this sort. i know some will say the

republicans use it to -- we did but we did it for bills that already passed the house or that there was at least agreement between house and the senate and it was to set expediting a process that was pretty well all the agreed upon -- best of the case here. the majority party in the house and the senate cannot even agree on what should be in the reconciliation package as far as i can tell. so i do appreciate your courtesy of allowing me to testify and i do hope that regular order will prevail. >> thank you very much. mr. barton, i think we will question these witnesses of energy and commerce so they can be allowed to leave the table. >> thank you. [laughter] >> so we can get more people in. >> i appreciate that. >> yes, indeed. mr. barton, conference would have been one. wonderful for the last three years but as you know we've not

been able to do that. and i know that senator mcconnell and house last year that there would be no conference on this bill. i appreciate that you're the bluebird of happiness. >> bluebird of happiness? >> somehow we believe we can do this all lovely and sweetness but we just don't have any evidence to prove that. i don't think -- i love to hear it, i agree with do, nothing would, please, me more and we were all working together and we try to get this done because it is the most important thing and i would be voting on in my career here. and i hated that one of the party says opted out to a something of this magnitude. but we have to play the hand that's dealt us. so we are going to be doing the best we can, but i have always appreciated your advice. >> can i comment on that briefly? >> of course. >> the thing that i probably

worked hardest on my time in the congress was the energy policy. we passed a comprehensive energy bill when i was chairman back in 2005, but that same bill did not get at a conference in 2003, i did not even get out of the senate in 2001, it took three congress is but we did finally get a bill and it did have bipartisan support than a ranking member dingell signed the conference report. approximately 1/3 of the house democrats voted for a majority of the senate democrats voted for it from a senator bingaman, and chairman dingell, myself and mr. demint she worked in a bipartisan fashion. it took six years but it did happen so i'm not saying that its sweetness and light to go the regular order -- but it brings everybody to the table when it forces compromises --

the reconciliation package that the budget committee has put together, the only people that have had input into that are the inside democrats in the house and the senate and i guess the president and his staff. so it automatically is not going to have all the compromises that would if you had a little bit different process like i've talked about. >> i don't know of anything that has had more hearings or more work, we've got over bill's section by section in our caucuses and worked hard on them. for the i was here during the clinton health care debate which was very much the same and i remember the things that were said about it and one of the worst for me was the information that one out to the senior citizens under the clinton health care plan if by some chance the senior renta the wrong doctor, it was going to cost them under clinton's plan

is a thousand dollars and maybe jail time. that's the kind of thing we've been having to fight here. and i really have to stand up for my side -- we have tried every way in the world to try to be bipartisan. we have one in conferences and simply have had to play the hand has been dealt us. i wish we could have done better and i think in time everybody will see that what we have done here has made a difference in the united states. we have to get on with it. mr. waxman, i thank you very much for the good work you done in your staff. >> thank you. >> i have no idea how many hours you put in on this. i couldn't even begin to contemplate that. but i know that like an from california said yesterday we feel like we've been pregnant for 17 months, let's cut off the already. thank you very much. mr. dreier. >> thank you very much. let me first say that i was told

that woman came up today we were going to hear from all the witnesses and and question them, i know a number of the members of the panel have very very important commitments that they like to address all i'd like to propose that i will make statements and then maybe we could hear from the other witnesses as we were told before we came up and then go to questions because of we exhaust and have everyone asked mr. waxman and mr. brown questions the means these other witnesses will sit for long time. >> i wasn't given that use. >> i was given that news. it was communicated to my staff that we were going to hear from the chairs and the ranking members of the committees and then going to begin with the questions. >> well, it's fine with me if mr. klein will move closer to mr. waxman said that mr. bill sarah can get over here by mr. ryan and then we can have everybody at the table. is that okay?

and we will go ahead and do that. >> i'm happy to move. >> thank-you and allow this year from mr. laugh-in for the ways and means committee. mr. levin is. >> i will let everybody be seated. >> you're very welcome. get a little close there. but that is a lot of brainpower. >> mr. laugh-in. >> thank you for this opportunity, let me say hello to some longtime colleagues and some of your colleagues. buyback is to you. we face a challenge not only in this country, --

>> is your microphone on? >> it isn't. is it on? >> that is better. >> better? so today we face a challenge not only in this congress but in the country and, indeed, i think it's a crisis. those who like their insurance, it's important that we be able to keep its. the problem is being too expensive to keep. the costs are going up. i looked at my home state of michigan, blue cross blue shield has a majority of the consumers in the state. they requested an increase of over 40 percent. people are subject to what are called recisions, the

determination of their policies and new limits. there are subject to lifetime caps. the data aren't entirely clear, but a huge proportion of the bankruptcy is in this country, because of medical costs. if people want to move and many are locked into their jobs because it's the only way they get insurance, but if they decide to move above they can be handicapped because of pre-existing conditions and they can't get their insurance. and then as we all know we have 45 million americans or more who don't have insurance. and so what this bill does is to build on the present system. 95 percent of americans would be covered.

we're the only nation industrial nation that has a huge number of uninsured people. and that is more than a challenge, it's a crisis. so what we do here is two have an individual mandate and i heard all of the discussion about the dangers of an individual mandate. in '93, '94 i remember it well, the linchpin of the republican approach on health care reform was an individual mandate. we provide tax credits and i want to talk about substance and not just focus on process, that's what we're here today to do. we have tax credits to make this affordable for people. and also then provided that if people will not pay per ride

insurance will be a payment. we have employer responsibility in this bill, and this has been so misstated, smaller businesses will be excluded altogether and as the vast majority of businesses. and we provide in this bill a tax credit to to help small businesses cover people. so we have an individual mandate, helping people play and we have employer responsibility. as mr. waxman has suggested, we began to close the downhole, the payments for prescription medicines by seniors that was in the bill, this does not hold that was passed by what is now the minority in this congress. so we go beyond this, this is a

fiscally responsible sets of provisions. i thank you know this, this bill extends the solvency of the trust fund for nine years. >> medicare? >> right in that cbo has to listen i read the literature that has come out that the cbo which rely to quote when you agree with it to has said that to the first 10 years we're going to reduce the deficit 130 billion and then the next 10 -- well, i rounded off of. i may be rounded off the wrong way. 1.3 trillion, that rounds adopted over the next 10. and so let me just say a few words as they finish about how we pay for it. we have a medicare health-insurance tax if you want to call it that.

on people who have income over take the family to under 50,000 and the tax is on the income over to richard 50,000. we take care of the overpayments for the manicured vantage, overpayments for what we do to say we need to fiscally responsible medicare advantage program. we also have the measures to control waste and abuse. there's an excise tax on health plans. we have debated it at length. people who say we haven't debated this bill, that it comes out of some sky or from under the ground, we have debated this provision as we have all others regarding the tax on health care

plans. every -- we reduce it by 80 percent. it is never in my judgment going to basically then to the curve of and i want to finish by talking about how we bend occurred in this proposal. we do it and we talked at length about this within the ways and means committee. we have pilot programs and retaken and the lid off of pilot programs. so that we can change the fee-for-service system and i look around. some of us know each other very well, others less well. i don't know everybody's family history. i know my own. our present system of based on fee-for-service has to change. we can do it overnight -- recants do it overnight. pay based on volume is the result has to change and what is

in this bill is the ipod mechanism, is controversial but what it does is to put in place a structure so that we can have recommendations to this congress. as to how we change the system over time. and retain in the congress the ability if we don't like the recommendations to come up with our own that meet these targets. so those who say that this is a system and that is based not to build on keeping which you have if you like it, there are very wrong. those to minimize the importance of covering 45 million americans who don't have insurance, they are wrong. those who say we are cutting medicare benefits, they are wrong.

what we are doing is cutting off the increase in the payments to providers overtime and if you challenged that you're saying there is no waste in this system, we are not heading for medicare benefits. and finally what we are doing is putting in place a structure so over time we can change the system so people can keep their health care, people can get their health care, the people can afford their health care. that's what you're doing in this bill. and so i come here today urging that this committee makes sure that we can have a structure, it's a fare structure, one that has been used before. there is nothing secretive about it. but something that allows this congress and i close with this, to step up to the plate and to do it successfully.

.. should be allowed to do so. thank you. >> madam with the camera.

>> is this on now? all right. thank you, madam chair and members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify on this legislation today. the american people have spoken. they don't want the federal government involved in personal health care and they don't want a bill that spends over a trillion dollars, raises half a trillion dollars in new taxes, cuts medicare by more than half a trillion dollars and increases americans's health insurance premiums. that is exactly what will happen if the house passes the senate democrats' health care bill on the reconciliation bill tomorrow. the american people have rejected this bill precisely because it taxes too much, spends too much and increases premiums too much to the tone of $569,200,000,000 in new taxes. these bills represent the largest tax increase in american

history. what are those taxes? they are a first time ever tax on health care benefits commonly referred to as the cadillac tax which raises taxes on the american people by $32 million. that will grow rapidly over the next decade. a new medicare tax on wages, self employment income and investment income that increases taxes by $210,200,000,000. a new tax on health insurance providers which will be passed on to consumers in the form of higher premiums. in total, $60.1 billion. a new employer mandate tax that will crush small businesses they guzman reduce wages and kill american jobs by increasing taxes on employers by $52 billion and indirectly by much more as employers are forced to spend more on health benefits even though unemployment is above 10%.

a new tax on drug manufacturers, importers of $27 million which will be passed on to consumers and a new tax on medical device manufacturers. new requirements on information reporting on payments to corporations that raises $17.1 billion. a higher floor for medical expenses that raises $15.2 billion in taxes. a new individual mandate tax which forces americans to purchase health care they don't want and can't afford or else pay this tax. this raises $17 billion. an earlier analysis. nearly half of that will be paid by americans earning 300% of the federal poverty limit which is

$66,150. once i mentioned clearly violate the president's pledge that no family with an income less than $250,000 would pay higher taxes and there are new limits on flexible spending accounts and cafeteria plans that raise $13 billion. there is an elimination of the deduction for expenses eligible for the medicare subsidy in order to raise tax revenue by $4.5 billion. other restrictions on health savings accounts held reimbursement arrangements and flexible spending accounts increase taxes by $5 billion. there is a new set of taxes to the tune of $2.7 billion. a limited deductibility of compensation paid to employees of health-insurance providers that increases taxes by $600 billion. to some that may seem a small number but it was refreshing to mention one in the millions

instead of billions but that is not all. there is a modification of the treatment of certain health organization that raises $400 million in new taxes. they deny the use of black liquor for biofuel produce credit. that raises $23.6 billion in tax revenue. and the economic substance doctrine that increases taxes by $4.5 billion and the joint committee on taxation tells us there are other, quote, revenue offsets to the tune of $60.3 billion and again these 20 different categories of tax increases total $569,200,000,000. these bills cut medicare by the same amount, $523,500,000,000 in cuts to a program that provides health care to the nation's

elderly and disabled and senate proposed cuts that were 12% smaller in medicare, the president's medicare actuaries predicted providers might end their participation in the program possibly jeopardize in care for beneficiaries. but we are being asked to send to the floor a bill that cuts deeper into medicare and the help that it provides. what are these cuts? there are $202,300,000,000 in cuts to the medicare health plan. including massive cuts targeting the reduce cost sharing seniors receive through medicare advantage. the congressional budget office predicted a similar policy would result in 4.8 million fewer seniors will be enrolled in these plans in 2019 and the independent medicare advisory commission, to enroll in

medicare advantage for the results of that policy. $156,600,000,000 in cuts to in patient and outppient services,ç in patient rehabilitation facilities, inpatient psychiatric hospitals, skilled nursing facilities, ambulatory and hospice and ambulance and dialysis facilities and durable medical equipment suppliers. $37.7 billion in health cuts to health care providers. 22.one billion dollars in additional cuts to hospitals by slashing reimbursements designed to assist hospitals that serve low-income patients. $27 billion in cuts to the medicare improvement fund intended to fund improvements to medicare benefits, not to finance a new entitlement. and the yet to be determined cuts from the hands of the federal board. $2.3 billion in cuts to imaging

reimbursements to other procedures. and cuts to wheelchair suppliers. and money taken from seniors in higher premiums. the $569,200,000,000 in taxes and the $523,500,000,000 in cuts to medicare to fund a new entitlement program are unacceptable especially when you consider these bills will increase the deficit. once the cost of the medicare dr. fix is factored in and the increase in health insurance for all americans. the democrats' bill will not only ruin health care but the tax increases will ruin our economy. i would like to close by making a few simple requests. i urge you not to make these bills in order. they are deeply flawed and should not be brought to the floor for a vote but if you

insist on making them an order wait until we have the missing but critical information we need about them such as the impact on health insurance premiums and national health care spending. with respect to the senate bill and the one the house passed the congressional budget office agreed both would raise the cost of health insurance and the medicare actuary's agreed both would increase national health care spending. today we are moving forward without the review, the medicare actuaries who are charged with evaluating the impact legislation like this would have on medicare. we ought to know if the, quote, fixes that will be passed potentially in reconciliation have worked or if they made the situation worse and if you insist on moving this to the floor tomorrow i request you not

use this so-called slaughter -- the american public deserves to know not to hide behind a procedural vote. >> now we have the chairman of the education labor committee, mr. miller. >> thank you for affording us this time. thank you for convening this meeting to convene a reconciliation act of 2010. i am proud to join my fellow committee chairman and subcommittee chairs along with my subcommittee chair to comment on the instruction the committee has given us for this historic legislation. in this reconciliation process the education labor committee was the only one to receive two instructions on budget resolution. we were test with reforms of health care and education to reduce the deficit.

we met those instructions. the legislation under consideration takes a step toward insuring affordability and greater access to health insurance and higher education. my fellow chairmen have highlighted portions of the health care reform and i will focus my comments on employer responsibility and insurance reform. the health insurance reform legislation is good for jobs and the economy and will lower skyrocketing premiums and allow american businesses to focus on getting jobs and the economy moving again. the bill creates health-insurance exchanges that will offer affordability -- affordable health insurance to small business and employees. employers with fewer than 50 employees will be exempt from the bill's responsibility requirements. the bill will provide tax credits to help provide coverage for employees. large employers have a choice.

they cannot afford a provider will coverage for workers or go to the exchange to receive assistance to obtain insurance. they must make fair contribution. this assures the insurance policy will be there by guaranteeing long overdue protections. they include prohibition on discrimination based on pre-existing conditions and prohibitions on lifetime benefits and interactive policy decisions. allow families to keep their kids on their plans up to age 26 and these reforms will be effective this year. in addition to fixing the health care system this bill fixes the broken student lending system. it will make the largest investment in financial assistance to families and students ever at no cost to the taxpayers. it contains -- it passed on bipartisan support. $36 billion in the program over ten years. it will invest $750 million in

college access and completion support for students including increasing financial literacy and make federal loan repayments more affordable for graduates paying off their loans. the legislation invests $2 billion in historic black colleges and universities serving institutions to help support those students and the bill invests $2 billion in community colleges to develop and improve educational career training programs. we will make these investments by ending wasteful subsidies given to big banks in our current student loan programs. this notion is far from radical. these subsidies have been identified as wasteful by president clinton and george w. bush. president obama has the courage to stop investing in corporate welfare for banks and invest in students and families. by switching to the more reliable cost-effective loan program will save taxpayers $61 billion and cut the deficit by $10 billion.

this reform will preserve a strong role for private lenders and allow them to service 100% of the loans which will insure customer service for barbers and protect jobs in the community. this will keep jobs in american soil. unlike loans by banks loans went to the government cannot be outsourced. the leading servicer of these repatriated 2,000 jobs as we move to the direct programming year-and-a-half ago. reforms will end the practice of banks tending loan servicing reforms out of the country and these are good for taxpayers and jobs and our economy and they are good for students and their families. i urge all of our colleagues to support this legislation. time that we take decisive actions on behalf of americans middle class and make this a lot of the land. as we understand from business with our constituents as we visit them every weekend health

care costs are crushing our families and businesses large and small and our economy. the system is broken and unsustainable and that comes from every sector of our economy and sector before the congress of the united states. >> mr. klein. >> members of the committee, appreciate the opportunity to testify before this panel yet i say with absolute conviction i wish we were not here on this day and under these circumstances. the underlying bill is well known from the tax increases of medicare cuts to the new mandate in federal intrusion. we all understand by the common shorthand for what is at stake the government health care take over. a few hours remaining before the final vote i believe my time is best spent talking about what the american people are arguing

about. there is plenty. it was the speaker of the house who told them audience of local officials, quote, we have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it. i beg to differ. the american people deserve to know what is at stake before legislation reaches the president's death. take a proposal to eliminate the largest financial aid program of public-private partnership used to finance millions of students college loans each year. most americans would never have predicted such a proposal was on the table much less it would be included in a bill aimed at reshaping our health care system. this would force every college student to 1-size-fits-all program. and one of the nation's largest banks. it takes a temporary problem, financing student loans in the face of a global financial crisis and makes a permanent federal policy. this could put taxpayers on the

hook for $100 billion a year in direct government lending and much more as college costs continue to rise. the government will take on an additional trillion dollars in long-term debt over the next decade, which we will load to china and other foreign creditors that a time when debts and deficits are far too high. students in schools was promised tens of billions of dollars if they were willing to swallow this plan to eliminate a popular financial aid program. instead, nine billion of the sixty-one billion created by eliminating the student loan program will be siphoned from democrats promises of reduction in education spending. democrats are using the student loan program as a slush program to pay for the health care plans. this appears to be a classic switch with students and schools forced to sacrifice a popular program and getting far less than what they bargained for in

return. it is not the only rude awakening for taxpayers. it includes another shady backroom deal modeled on the kick back and louisiana purchase. the bank of north dakota would remain in the more popular student loan program even as it is abolished for every other state in the nation. call it the bismarck bank job. the senator who secured the sweetheart deal has decided at the eleventh hour that bad publicity is not worth the benefit for the state but we have not seen the amendment to strike this outrageous car out to. government takeover of health care will be bad enough. add to what a government takeover of student lending and we realize this is not about doing what is right for american families but expanding the size, scope and power of the federal government. i close by adding my voice to that of my colleagues to ask that you do not bring forth a pass rule.

let's have a straightforward vote on the senate bill. i yield back. >> member of the budget committee, sarah? >> thank you. it is on. >> make sure it is closed. >> appreciate your patience with us and the privilege to be here on behalf of chairman spratt and the members of the budget committee. rather than reading to my testimony which i will submit for the record let me read to you what a couple constituents of mine recently sent me. eric wrote the following. i am a self-employed architect for a very expensive bottom line high deductible policy. my wife and i are covered but my son had a stroke when he is eight years old. our coverage costs $750 per

month. this is beyond what we can afford. if jumps in price. last time we use it it was the $250 per month -- of we enter another increase it will -- benjamin wrote our insurance company counsel my wife's coverage, after it was approved for an m r i. the bill took three years to pay off. rather than put a bill that was preceded for her. it is akin to gambling. with passage of health care, eric will secure affordable health insurance for his son and insurance company, from gouging him and his wife through

repeated premium increases and out of pocket cost increases. had this been before benjamin, and he would have saved years of unscrupulous charges for that m r i treatment and invested the money in their family. madam chair, this week on monday the budget committee follow its instructions and passed out the reconciliation bill that was provided for in the resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2010, included two reconciliation instructions on section 202. the second for legislation in education. following the prescriptions i just mentioned, the reconciliation, and that legislation was sent to the

committee, authorizing new has members of the committee to report forward to the house of representatives a reform for america after failure by seven previous presidents giving americans a chance to have affordable health care. arbiter survival rates for their citizens then we in this country. there are 7 countries in the world that when a child is born in their country, that child will live to be one year of age. we are ahead of turkey and mexico in mortality rates. as the richest country in the world, the best systems for health care, 20 fourth when it comes to longevity of each of us

our mortality rates ranked behind 23 other countries. doing nothing is not a solution to this health care crisis. we have unsustainable rates and charges not just to the federal government and its budget but the american taxpayer. we believe it is time to act. we are prepared to move forward and the budget committee sends this reconciliation package for your approval and vote and moving to the floor. >> mr. brian? >> it is a pleasure to be here today. the budget committee realizes it will be in tandem with the senate bill. this legislation, it would produce a sweeping overhaul of

the health-care sector and fundamentally change the relationship between patients and doctors and put washington in control and raise taxes by 56 -- it didn't raise $500 billion, just as the economy is struggling to create jobs. it will add a trillion dollars entitlement program on top of the fact that we have $76 trillion in liabilities we don't know how to pay for. with you believe this should be enacted, i doubt there is disagreement about the sweeping nature of this legislation or the convoluted process unfolding here. the majority will cite cases of abuse. you will not find the midst of

abuse in this legislation. it is breathtaking. you are the experts on house rules. i want to focus on the extraordinary and unprecedented abuse of the budget reconciliation process. reconciliation has been abused in the past which is why the senate adopted the bird rule. reconciliation has never been the abuse to the extent that it is today. we are using last year's budget resolution which has a target of $1 billion in instructions to sweep into law a $2.2 trillion entitlement. in 2006 it was $40 billion. it forces the budget resolution, one dollar and deficit reduction and when we do that let's create

a trillion dollars entitlement. we are greasing the skids to abuse the budget reconciliation procedure to control the government, not expand it. the key to the government act was to rein in the president's power and give the congress means to control the budget. to day the budget act is being used ironically by this president to jam through the largest expansion in 40 years. the budget office are very good people who are being overworked. they do their jobs very well but their job is to score what is in front of them. let us talk about what is in front of them. it is a legislation full of gimmicks. when you strip away the double counting and the faulty assumptions it is clear that the overall does not reduce the deficit and does not contain costs. the speaker let the cat out of

the bag, we will pass the dock fix. i asked, to put in there and -- to pass the dock fix as the speaker is claiming, this wipes out the claim of deficit reduction. this shows us that. i shrunk this because it is a small room and it may be too big as well. let's look at the fuzzy mass inside this bill. looking at the letters we have gotten yesterday and a few days before they are claiming $138 billion in this bill and that is the smoke and mirrors. $70 billion of premiums looks to pay the benefit of the class act but are being sequestered to pay