i was the most constructive path to avoiding a government shutdown that is looming in the december, and forcing us and the congress to come together to work on a budget agreement. thank you, mr. van hollen, for that very constructive proposal. this is creating great economic uncertainty. ..

are also being undercut by the uncertainty created year in the congress. i am very happy if this is being done in an open setting today because it lays bare the priorities of the two parties year in congress. the democratic priority is to address budget uncertainty, come together, work out a plan, move forward and avoid a government shutdown. the republican priority however is to continue to attack women's health care and intimidate planned parenthood, nonprofit clinics and the women that go there for their health services. this weekend continues and is not serving the interests of our great country. it is beneath the dignity of this congress. what is going to happen when we come back after next week? there's a new and gauzy-like select committee to continue this weekend. this is an all-time low. there has been an attack on

women tell for decades but now the all-time low happened this summer with these manufactured youtube videos becoming the basis of public policy in america. all the investigations done here in the congress and across the country have demonstrated no wrongdoing whatsoever so we are going to waste taxpayer funds and important time on this witchhunt. i think it is very unfortunate. the approval ratings of congress are at an all-time low and i have to say this demonstrates why that is. because congress is the so-called governing body, it is not focused on the priorities for our great country. instead focus on intimidating women across the country. i heard a no vote on this motion.

>> thank you. there we go again. for the 62 time. president reagan used that all the time, there we go again. when i was elected to this position, the members of my district would say over and over again we wind you to go down there and helped fix the system. the chairman just admitted the budget has nothing to do with the economy and certainly what we are doing today has nothing to do with putting men and women back to work. our constituents want us to do our job. but what we have here, many members sit on our services where we heard leadership,

generals come to us and we need predictability, we can't plan on this but what we doing today, doing exactly that. making work. this is not doing our job. i heard the term bipartisan. there has never been of those on this panel where one member of the party voted for the other. that is not by partisanship, that is not working together. and the american people are disgusted with it. and talking about taking health care services, >> this is exactly what is wrong with congress. what is going on here today. no chance of this bill ever

making it to law. we are wasting our time here and the american people need to see what is going here. and urge our members to take a look at how dysfunctional this committee and this congress is and i urge us once and for all, instead of just putting up talking point out, i yield back my time. >> thank you for summing up, they're working and pressing issues, investing in the economy trying to take 16 million americans to defend women's health care programs. >> at the end lets close.

>> and the majority of this committee the u.s. senate got us to a reconciliation placed the we haven't been since 2001. now we have a chance to continue reducing our deficits, work on the debt and make policies that are sorely needed in this country. we need to do more of it. i asked about women's health care, i remind committee members and did this underlying bill, we actually increase spending on women's health care, $235 million in fiscal year 16-17 to dispense on community health centers. with respect to my motion i think because this process doesn't happen, hasn't happened every year in quite some time that we as a budget committee ought to preserve our say in the process and that is what this motion does. i urge committee members, all of them to support it wholeheartedly and i yield back.

>> agreeing to the motion all those in favor signify by saying i. all those opposed say no. nos have it and a recorded vote is requested and the clerk will call the roll. the clerk -- we may have to wake up our members first. click will call the roll. >> [roll call vote] [roll call vote]

[roll call vote] [roll call vote] [roll call vote]

[roll call vote] [roll call vote] >> members wishing to vote, change their vote. clerk will report. >> the eyes are 21 and the nos are 13. >> the motion is agreed to. they're not here for the first vote, at the close of business today to had any statement to the record regarding this

hearing. this completes consideration of restored americans' health care free reconciliation act of 2015, the committee stands adjourned. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

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

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

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

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

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

>> the house budget committee markup of the 2016 budget resolution reconciling measures put forward by the house ways and means committee, the energy and commerce committee and the education in the work force committee. we expect them to come back after their break continuing their work throughout the day-to-day. republicans met in another closed-door meeting to continue talks on the process of collecting data selecting the next speaker of the house after kevin mccarthy withdrew himself from consideration yesterday. as lawmakers headed into the meeting reporters asked questions about some members who were suggested as potential candidates. here is a look. [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] a [inaudible conversations] >> being vice president but got talked into it. that is the speculation. [inaudible conversations] >> when do you think you might make an announcement if you are going to make an announcement?

when do you think you will make an announcement? >> we will talk about it. >> are you considering a run for speaker? >> i said i would support him. >> when will you make your decision? >> i don't know. >> the republicans' closed-door meeting lasted about an hour and coming out of the meeting several lawmakers answered questions from reporters. we start with stray goudy --trey gaudi of south carolina. >> wanted you to read that note. >> to open it. >> i wouldn't. >> what was in the note? >> he is of good friend and i

wanted to give him more encouragement. >> if you were to get in. 100%. >> how is the pressure on you right now? >> that i'm going to be late with the meeting with the lives succumbing is and i don't want to be late. >> what is it going to get paul ryan to executive? >> just about his wife and family. >> what the mean just about? come on, that is pretty important. just about the most important thing. >> what happens next? >> a new election. >> any idea -- what do you think -- >> do you want the job? >> no. >> does anybody? >> we will find out.

i think paul can get everybody. >> talking about -- potential lead to be a candidate. >> you will have to ask jeremiah. >> doesn't look like people would want -- to the conference? >> you would have to ask. >> is john boehner going to stay on? any idea? i know he wants to go out -- >> don't know. we just have to set the due date. >> there you go, guys. >> can you tell me what you are saying? please, sir. >> make it quick. we have a very good conference working together, trying to work

together, i know a lot of speculation about who should run and others. paul is looking at us but it is his decision. if he decides to do with you will be an amazing speaker but he has to decide on his own. >> what do you mean -- >> you heard it here. >> we are going to take this at a slow pace. try to figure out what we need to do to get the country moving. >> you were talking -- >> i would hope not. create some trouble. i did not.

>> talking about an affair with kim mccarthy. >> that is their decision to interpret it that way. this is something that i think is important to the american people. anybody in leadership, male or female, should be a man or woman of integrity. that is nothing personally about anybody. >> that is kind of an assumption. it is an active of fact. >> it was total chaos here. i don't want to see that happen again. >> urging paul ryan, it is just taking that in a slow way. common ground, need to change the rules and things like that.

>> to elect a new speaker. >> we need to. >> to call it. >> the discussion. [inaudible conversations] >> members are going to go home and visit. additional candidates. and the house of

representatives. actively be campaigning coin. and to do it that. they can do that. >> the speakermade the right decision, not everybody but the doctors surprise, the rules of the speaker. >> the speaker of some sort. and -- clearly he is somebody, i would love if he did it. and a drum beat of consistency and do it. paul ryan got into with of course i would support him. he is the kind of person i could

get excited about but part of the reason i got into the race, people like paul ryan were not stepping up to do it. >> why would he dropped out? >> i would support the nominee. >> do you want to -- >> not run against paul ryan. try to be as clear as i can. if paul ryan gets in the race i would support paul ryan and hope he would do it. we have to get somebody who wants to do it and will fight for it and make the most of it. maybe his approach changes that he is in my mind the most qualified person to do it and i hope he will do it. >> is john boehner still excited to step down by the end of the month? >> the speaker was clear he wanted to get through this before the end of the month. i got to mark up, glad you are all going to come, going to be

great. >> thank you. [inaudible conversations] >> what are you discussing changing? >> all kinds of discussions. i am not an expert on the rules. issues like two thirds vote on the chair and all sorts of issues like that in certain discussions, members are obligated to vote for the nominee at the caucus on the floor. i am not suggesting that is necessarily a good rule. >> among the candidates jason jacobs said he would pull out of paul ryan got in. is anyone else liable?

>> i don't want -- paul ryan is thinking very hard about this bringing a lot of folks together but the bigger challenge is not we put in the speaker's chair but how we change the underlying political dynamic that got us in this situation in the first place. whoever it goes in the chair will change the political, that is a harder question and anyone thinking of becoming the next speaker will have to understand that. >> you are not sure paul ryan could change the dynamic. >> i don't know that anybody can. he is highly respected by all members but he is a smart guy. he understands this. >> se beaker could strategizing how to deal with it, continue the john boehner method, containing everything. throw over democrats. and how to pan---

>> on the budget agreement. and that is how we did that. hurricane sandy, opening the government. at how much drama do you have to deal with. and have a final resolution. in that final step a lot sooner. >> how do you get nominated? >> it is the conundrum. the conundrum is this. the new speaker could do this, the bipartisan coalition dealing with facts on the right or continue on the course we have been on. that would make it effective.

>> the think of that by the end of the month? >> i hope so. >> paul ryan is thinking about it. >> we are talking about it. you have to ask paul ryan what he is planning. >> did he do that? >> i don't think so. >> anyone stand up, look him in the eye and say -- >> this is going to be at resources two weeks of internal discussion. or that person emerges on the side of it. >> number of people thinking about this. >> clear the hall please. >> if paul ryan were to block it out, continuing to do that. >> i am not challenging him.

i am going to make that point. >> run all the way to the florida matter if paul ryan would rather not. >> congress, getting to that date. >> you will be a candidate on the floor no matter what. >> running at the conference so there is going to be a date set for an election in the conference. >> if you don't get the nomination in the conference? >> i am just running for the conference. >> will you back the conference? >> we will see what happens. >> at the end of the month. >> spoke to mr. ryan about a conference? >> i have not. >> whoever the conference points to? >> i was focused on one thing,

winning the conference. >> what if we don't for which the speaker? >> y -- like i said before, we have a power base system where two people make all the decisions. i want to do what i did in florida, switch down the pyramid of power. that is all i want. not running against anybody, not running against a personality or a name. just running for that set of principles. we have a principal base. >> could paul ryan be that? [inaudible conversations] >> was inappropriate to it delay the election like that?

>> probably necessary. i do. >> would they have delayed it? >> probably -- i think it will be done. before the end of the month. >> would you say there is more of that? different candidates, would they be able to expand on that? >> i don't know. one of the candidates -- like i said, i am not -- candidates for personalities. member driven.

don't agree to it. [inaudible conversations >> you want them to decide. >> i you ready for a speaker. >> some of the lawmakers out of the closed-door meeting, selecting the next speaker of the house. he has since said he will stay on and waiting till the next speaker is expected. we have been live on c-span2

with the house budget committee markup, they end their work for today. there's a vote on the house floor exporting crude oil which has been banned for four decades. you can watch that under way on our companion network c-span. take a look back at the budget committee from earlier, they were to reconcile measures by the house, ways and means committee, and the education and work force committee. >> a package of legislation submitted by three house committees with reconciliation and instructions, and bridget -- resolution. this will give congress the opportunity to move legislation for house and senate in an expedited manner, to the president's desk for his consideration. for the first time in over a decade congress passed a bicameral ten year balanced budget that is a pro-growth plan

to promote job creation and economic opportunity, hold washington accountable, make government more efficient and effective, support key priorities like national security and health and retirement security and get our fiscal house in order. now because the house and senate reached an agreement on the budget we have the opportunity to pursue this reconciliation process. fiscal year 16 budget resolution states the reconciliation not to be used to address obamacare in an effort to help all americans gain access to the health care and coverage they want, not that the government forces them to buy and that is what we are doing here today. we are committed to protecting every american from this harmful law and the damage it has done and will do to patients, health care providers, family budgets and job creators. whether it is the viewer health care choices telex assets to care, higher out-of-pocket costs, less medical information obamacare is an attack on quality health care in our

nation. this week the three house committees charged with reconciliation, ways and means committee, education and work force committee and energy and commerce committee held their markups on their respective recommendations and i want to thank chairman ryan and chairman kline and chairman ofton for the hard work of that committee members. this is a team, their committees have shown real leadership in this endeavor. under the reconciliation process the will of the house budget committee is to combine the recommendations sent over from the three committees into a single bill and consider that single bill in our committee before reporting it to the full house for consideration. a quick review of the policies in this legislation demonstrates a concerted effort to provide relief to the american people from the damage inflicted by obamacare by focusing resources where they can do the most good. the ways and means committee achieve $37 billion in savings by repealing the individual and employer mandates, the so-called

cadillac tax, medical device tax and independent payment advisory board. and unaccountable bureaucrats and powered by obamacare to make decisions that will effectively deny care to seniors. and the prevention and public health and, they included an additional policy that will prevent for one year taxpayer dollars from being used to pay abortion providers for the in the legislation. this is accompanied by more money and more resources for hundreds of community health centers across this country so that women would have greater access to health care. education and work force committees achieve $7.9 billion in savings by repealing obamacare's employer auto enrollment, when these 3 components are combined into one bill the total savings is $79.8 billion. to get this package will dismantle many of the key elements of obamacare at harming

individuals and families, hurting job creation and spending taxpayer dollars on programs with little to no congressional oversight. our goal here is to save the country from this disaster as long with patient centered healthcare solutions where patients and families and doctors are making medical decisions, not washington d.c.. the job of the budget committee to combine these recommendations, it is not within our power under the reconciliation process to make substantive changes to the legislation before us. states that each subcommittee said directed will promptly make such determination and recommendations to the committee on the budget of the house which upon receiving all such recommendations shall report to its house reconciliation legislation carrying out all such recommendations without any substantive revision. therefore today's market may not include any amendments. there will be an opportunity for

motions for process after the legislation is addressed. i want to thank this committee and the committees who drafted legislation for their efforts and look forward to today's debate and i now yield for his opening statement to the ranking member, mr. van holland. >> thank you, mr. chairman. it is absolutely mind-boggling that we are here in this piece of legislation, we all know the be have a crisis of leadership within the republican caucus and that may be just a matter of political intrigue to some. this is causing harm to the country as we speak. we had at huge number of pressing issues facing the country right now. the threat of another government shutdown in mid december, we have got the debt payments and debt ceiling that needs to be addressed so the united states makes good on the full faith and

credit of the united states so we don't put the economy at great risk. we have transportation authorization bill that expires within weeks. here we are today for that 62 time trying to dismantle the affordable care act and on top of that attack women's health programs including planned parenthood. so rather isn't tackling those issues, here we are trying to do the bidding of a faction of this house that just can't come to terms with the fact that the affordable care act is the law of the land and upheld twice by the supreme court. it is pretty outrageous the focus is on dismantling the affordable care act. i draw my colleagues's attention to the congressional budget office's analysis of this reconciliation bill. as everyone here knows these are

the nonpartisan experts, the new head of the cbo is there appointed by this chair, the chairman on the other side of the capital. and here is what the congressional budget office reports this bill will do. it would reduce the number of non elderly people in the united states with health insurance coverage by about 14 to 15 billion in most years, 20% of those estimated to be children. i would like to put up a chart. as you can see the affordable care act has had a dramatic impact in reducing the number of uninsured in this country. it is doing its intended job of providing affordable health care to another 16 million people. including children. and yet the priority of republican colleagues in this house at the time of dysfunction and pressing issues is to pass a

piece of legislation that will take that health-insurance away from 16 million americans. it is astounding. at the same time we see an attack on women's health programs i would like to point up another chart here, this house has had three committees investigating planned parenthood. this was the conclusion announced by the chairman of the committee on national television the other day. is there any evidence in your opinion that planned parenthood has broken any laws? no, i am not suggesting they broke the law. next chart please. at the hearing where the committee brought the head of planned parenthood in front of them for 4-1/2 hours, it wasn't a question of planned parenthood's wrongdoing, the chart that was put up to try to make the point by the republican chairman of the committee was given a pants on fire rating meaning the most untruthful statement you can make by the

nonpartisan public effect. here we are with a piece of legislation designed to deprive 16 million americans from affordable health care, designed to go after the of women's health programs and a witch hunt against an organization that provides cervical cancer screenings and other important preventive health measures for american women and that seems to be the priority. mr. chairman, you said this would actually help reduce the deficit. i also refer my colleagues to the cbo report and draw your attention right here to page 8 and what it says is if you look at the of long-term beyond our artificial ten year windows this legislation increases the deficit. all this talk about balanced budgets is just nonsense. this actually increases our

deficit over the period of time outside the ten year window. and interestingly the chairman mentioned within the ten year window has a $79 billion of cuts but those go away. that is just an artificial marker and if i remember the republican budget have almost $4 trillion of cuts in mandatory spending. this is your one shot at reconciliation, your one shot. you are telling the world you didn't mean it when you put forward that whole budget. you are coming up with a piece of legislation that in the long run increases the deficit. doesn't come close to balancing the budget. that was all smoke and mirrors and you're doing it with the expense of 16 million americans who now have affordable health care, taking that away and launching an attack on women's

health programs and an organization that the chairman of your own invested over a committee set hasn't violated the laws, and himself put forward an argument that got him the most untruthful rating from non-partisan politicfacts. i suggest a proposal to prevent the government shutdown. i hope we can agree on that. we certainly don't agree on the idea of taking the way health care for millions of americans. >> this piece of legislation is not -- is in a vacuum. you can't do policy changes in the reconciliation bill. to stipulate this number of folks or that number of folks, looking at this legislation not in the context of a free and reform and in fact what we believe thought to occur is to have patient centered reform where patients and families and doctors make these decisions not in washington d.c..

it is important to point out of the american people, significant majority continue to oppose this law. they do so because it violates the principles of healthcare, violates principles, not that republicans hold, not the democrats hold, those principles are we want the system that is accessible for everybody, is affordable for everybody, at the highest quality, provides a system that is responsive to patients. and patients where in the like. this is why we are bringing this forward. we believe the american people should be positively and aggressively and actively represented by this congress

represent their concerns about this piece of legislation, the difference this time, the reconciliation process to have the senate actually get to the legislation without filibustering that occurs democratic colleagues on this side, get a piece of legislation, positive activity going on after today, i encourage our members to continue to move this forward. i yield two minutes to the gentleman from indiana, the vice chair of the committee. >> good morning, six years ago congress passed the affordable care act otherwise known as obamacare under the guise of increasing access to care. it is clear that obamacare is bad for families, for small businesses and bad for our economy. the economy is struggling to recover and to this administration we need legislation that will provide jobs and opportunity for all americans without placing a

burden on future generations and that is the key. this law continues to impose onerous taxes on families and job creators. according to calculations by the senate budget committee obamacare will cost you generations $6.2 trillion over the next 75 years. obamacare will cost you generations $6.2 trillion over the next 75 years. we have a moral obligation not to pass it on to children or grandchildren, obamacare negatively impacted our economy and opposes mandating double burden employers and rob them of their ability for flexibility angeles's, needs of their employees. according to the budget office obamacare will cost 2.5 million employees to drop out of the labour market. that is the congressional budget office. obamacare will cost 2.5 million employees to drop out of the labour market, and create hundreds of rules forcing businesses, thousands of man

hours complying with new washington regulations. we should instead look to free up businesses and promote growth, this will reduce the deficit by $75 million and set us on a path toward the health care system that favors cutting costs and higher taxes and create jobs. republicans in the budget in this reconciliation process are supporting greater economic freedom and opportunity supporting families and job creators. >> i now yield want gentleman, mr. garrett. >> there is bipartisan agreement at the medical device act, representative voted to repeal it in the 114th congress and the 112st congress sales on other products like alcohol and tobacco, but this proposes excise tax on manufacturing life-saving and life improving devices. additionally it is a tax on sales, not profits. us on a medical device firm, and

disproportionately so the massive costs imposed by obamacare, supporters came up with the medical device tax they feel holds that growth on innovation and health care. and employment and reductions, lost jobs, 14,000 industry workers last year and years prior implementation of tax with approximately 4500 jobs in 2014 according to industry trade groups. the industry will include 20,000 employees over the next five years considering jobs lost, jobs not created, tax results in 39,000 fewer industry jobs. simply put the medical device tax is an effort to innovate, next generation of life-saving technology at risk and therefore encourage members from both sides of the aisle to support its repeal. >> one minute to the gentleman from florida. >> thank you. under the president's health care law an independent advisory board was created giving 15

bureaucrats a mandate to cut seniors's access to chair enforces providers to stop seeing medicare patients. the house passed legislation this year with bipartisan support revealing this board buyout rather large margin. republicans and democrats agree allowing bureaucrats in washington to make these kinds of critical health care decisions instead of allowing patients and their families to make those decisions is not the right way to keep our promises to american seniors. for those reasons and many years this reconciliation package will repeal that superunaccountable bureaucrats board. >> one minute to the gentleman from oklahoma. >> thank you for yielding the time. i want to focus on the reconciliation package that enjoys strong bipartisan support, repeal of the 40% excise tax on health care plans deemed to be too generous. this is due to take effect in 2018 including plants which

provide benefits above $10,200 for individuals or $27,500 for families. recent survey by mercer anticipates 1-third of the employers who face this tax in 2018, by 2020 to the number grows 60%. the tax leads to less generous coverage which leads to higher costs for employees in the form of higher deductibles and co-pays. the exact opposite of what be affordable health care plan was supposed to accomplish. republicans have a bill to repeal this tax with 106 co-sponsors, democrats have a bill to repeal this tax with 143 democratic co-sponsors. even democratic presidential candidate hillary clinton supports repealing this tax ally would encourage my colleagues to support this sensible provision which only serve to provide consumers with inferior health care at higher prices. >> one minute to the gentleman from california. >> the reconciliation process is a powerful tool intended to

enact the statutory change necessary to implement the budget act and i share the ranking member's disappointment that it doesn't implement the entire budget and i am glad he is disappointed the we are not implementing the entire budget. that is the acute, as huge improvement and real progress but baby steps are better than no steps. the reconciliation bill repeals obamacare and the individual mandate, that is a good thing and a good reason to support the reconciliation act. this mandate the worse is healthy young people into paying exorbitant premiums to underwrite the expenses of older and sicker patients, we force a young person to pay much more than they should for their insurance of the others pay much less if they don't pay that exorbitant premium we tax them to death while still requiring they pay back their student loans. repealing this mandate means reducing the tax burden on young families by $43 billion over the next 20 years, that is a good thing to do on policy grounds.

>> 2 minutes to the gentlelady from tennessee. >> please to speak briefly today on a privilege -- provision of the reconciliation package that is dear to my heart and that is the language placing 1-year moratorium on the payments on planned parenthood. i know my colleagues across the aisle have refused to watch these undercover videos implicating planned parenthood and the trafficking of fetal tissue. perhaps they haven't seen this. independent forensic report confirming authenticity and i believe by not offering a response we in congress will be shirking our duties the people sent us here to represent. that is why does reconciliation package places on 1-year moratorium on funding to select abortion providers like planned parenthood and instead redirect those dollars to more than 13,500 community health centers across this country. as you know i am registered nurse and i wouldn't support

legislation that would block access to preventative care so my colleagues should know that this measure actually increases funding for community health centers by $235 million. as members of this committee know, i unapologetically am pro-life but all of us should want to do everything in our power to ensure the taxpayer dollars are spent with integrity and not told out to entities that skirt the law. this is not a political statement. this is quite literally our job in congress and on this committee in particular. we have a real and legitimate question about potential illegal activities in planned parenthood. until those questions are answered and it is fully appropriate to call a timeout on taxpayer funding and spend that money to send that money to federally qualified providers that offer a better standard of care to women who needed the most and that is exactly what this provision in the reconciliation package will

accomplish and i urge this committee to prioritize women's health over the interests of a scandal-ridden politically allied abortion giant and support the reconciliation bill with the language included. i yield back my time. >> two minutes to the gentlelady from tennessee. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i want to commend ms. frank for her excellent work regarding this issue and let me start where she left off. talking about these community health centers. because this is not a reduction in funds. this is a repositioning of funds. quite frankly it puts the money where people need it to deliver the care when it comes to women's health. it really gets to addressing the issue of access. we talk a lot about access and having services where people need the services and is important to note that for every one planned parenthood center in

the country there are fears in community health centers. you take a district like mine there is no planned parenthood facility and you have got 16 of the community health centers so it gives you an idea of the bread and expansion of access looking at 10,000 of these community health centers around the country. also our community health centers would be increased as planned parenthood reduce their services through the years and community health centers have seen the increase, they see 21.one million patients each and every year and that is eight times the number by planned parenthood. this is the repositioning of those funds to the centers where the money is going to meet the greatest need and do the most good. the other provision that was mentioned is the investigation that is going on and yes indeed,

it is important to realize planned parenthood is not-for-profit. they are not a federal agency. they are not for profit. any not-for-profit that increase their request but also decrease or cut in half their services over the last seven years which is what planned parenthood has done we call them in and want to know what they're doing with the funds, they are getting half billion taxpayer dollars a year so it is important that we do the review and while they are under review, that we make certain that the funds are not going to them and with that i yield back. >> the gentleman from south carolina is recognized for one minute. >> america used to be known as the land of opportunity. now not so much. with the employer mandate and other mandates under the affordable care act you concede president barack obama has issue in six years more regulations and mandates than any president since lyndon johnson. she is at 120,000 mandates and

regulations. next slide please. folks trying to get to the middle class and living on the edge under the affordable care act, they can get free government health insurance. it might be an insurance policy they can't use because of the high deductibless but they can get free government health-insurance. the problem is they can't get a job because if you look all these mandates and regulations and you see the effect on this slide, for the last five years business start ups have been outpaced by business closings for the first time in 80 years. you think all these regulations don't matter, look at the fact, look at the slide. more businesses are closing than being formed in this country. they might be able to get free government health insurance that they usually can't use but they can't get a job. >> thank the gentleman, the gentleman from indiana recognized for one minute.

>> as a sitting u.s. representative of warsaw, indiana known as the orthopedic capital of the world, the burdens of medical device tax is close to home for me and those of us in indiana. indiana as a whole is second in the nation in exports of live science products and across the state 20,000 hoosiers are directly employed by the medical device industry alone, could the medical in indiana developing life changing and life-saving innovations for our country and the world. the impact in our communities and neighbors is one reason i fought so hard to repeal this destructive tax on the joints, knees, hips and increases patient's quality of life, hard-working hoosier is in my state no taxation does not create jobs, it kills them. in fact a recent study has shown the medical device tax has cost more than 33,000 jobs nationally so far. ..

concerns have been raised that the mandate will create unnecessary confusion for workers and employers and result in penalties for those already enrolled in health insurance coverage. for example, if the veteran is hired and is insured under tri- care for this mandate would force his employer to enroll him in costly healthcare deducting money from his hard earned paycheck to pay for potentially

worse coverage than he or she already has. borst, coercion, top down is obamacare, no freedom or free market here. by eliminating this provision we can help cleaning our deficits and debt and rollback harmful provision in the president healthcare law. i find it a bit ironic that the ranking member is so concerned deficits and debt we are-- when we are approaching 400 trillion dollars deficit this year and the other side has not made one proposal since i've been here for the last year to rein in those issues. these are important priorities for the american people and we can achieve both by repealing obamacare mandate known guys auto enrollment. to thank you and i yield back to the chairman. >> please yield one minute to the gentleman from arkansas. >> thank you mr. chairman. this budget repeals the prevention public health fund. this fund is quite simply a

sludge pond an example of a sledge fund created by obamacare to funnel billions of dollars automatically in the fund and never expires to read under current law the administration receives $1 million per year with little oversight, so what is this an ministration do with the one million dollar per your slush fund? you might think they would give to the cdc to work on early detection prevention to prevent cervical cancer or immunizations, fluid vaccines or many other useful-- useful efforts, but no, they use this fund according to what the committee on energy and commerce has uncovered, they use it to promote pickle ball, free pet neutering and massage therapy kickboxing and zumba. they have also, congressional investigators had linked the use

of funds to questionable lobbying activities by the administration and if that was not enough, the cdc was allocated taxpayer dollars to award grants for wellness efforts, but these funds were used to run ads attacking and singling out legal american products and industries, which the administration claims contributed to that health. mr. chairman, no government agency should receive american taxpayer dollars to advertise against american-made products. i yield back. >> i think the gentleman and my college for pointing out the remarkable challenges but american people are having. now, with this law and that is why we gather today. to be able to put forward a piece of legislation that recognizes and respects the principles of healthcare. current law makes health care less affordable for the american people and current law makes health care less accessible by the american people. current law harms the quality of

healthcare for the american people. the current law decreases innovation in the healthcare arena and thereby decreasing further quality of care being provided to the american people and the current law destroys, destroys choices that are so necessary for patients and families and doctors. those individuals that ought to be in charge of healthcare, not our federal government, so i commend my college for their observation and appreciate their support for this piece of legislation. that concludes the majority general debate time and i now yield 20 minutes to the ranking member and ask unanimous consent that he be authorized to yield such time and without objection, so ordered. >> thank you, mr. chairman, just interested in your characterization that probably a majority of this organization get their health care through the affordable care act and gone exchanges and i have noticed-- not notice the government telling me what plan to get and, you know, i hope we extend access to affordable care to 16 million americans who now

have it who didn't. with that i yield to an minutes to mr. york. >> thank you very much. i am glad the chairman mention that because this is getting to be a groundhog day debate and it a good thing about groundhog day debate as you don't have to prepare for them because you have done and so may times and i'm happy to repeat the impact of the affordable care act on the commonwealth of kentucky. under the aca in kentucky more than 520,000 individuals have acquired coverage that they did not have before. we have reduced the other implement rate-- i mean, the uninsured rate in kentucky by more than 50%, one of the best impact on the country in my district in louisville, kentucky, we have reduced the uninsured rate of 81% pure there are now fewer than 20000 people in my district without health insurance and that's a phenomenal record. more importantly, maybe not more importantly, but equally important is the governor of kentucky asset accounting firm to do a study of what the impact of the aca wuld be on

consecutive chewing 2015 and 2020, and they can back and said the aca of kentucky would create 42000 or jobs, $38 billion in increased economic activity and would have a positive impact on the kentucky state budget of $820 million for your so, the aca is working in kentucky and it's working many places throughout this country. to take the 60s something attempt to repeal and not replaced, just repeal would be a tragedy for this country. definitely tragedy for the commonwealth of kentucky. i yield back. >> mr. chairman, i yield to an half minutes. >> thank you, mr. ranking member, mr. chairman. under the affordable care act, which has occupied three quarters of our conversation so far, even though we are talking about the total budget, but i

guess that's immaterial. under the aca children can no longer be denied coverage because of a pre-existing condition. that aca expanded coverage for kids aging out of a foster care and allows children to receive oral and vision coverage as support of their benefit plans. this is what you are trying to take away. this is only one issue concerning the aca, just one issue, so you can pontificate or you want about what this consulate that cost to read what is your plan? what is your idea of addressing just one part of what this legislation deals with? you have no plan. you think that should be done either in the private sector or use think that should be done with people's income, even those who cannot afford it. so, i urge my colleagues, focus on the funding. funding this government and priorities that the american

people care about. you know, when the president introduces budget in february, he said something interesting and i want to close on this point, mr. chairman, there are a lot of things to talk about, but he talked about reversing my list-- my less prosperity. i think you are recuperating from-- their financial problems. returning to the mindless austerity of sequestration in 2016 would bring discretionary funding to its lowest level adjusted for inflation since 2006. the budget proposes to end sequestration, fully reversing it with a domestic priorities and 2016. that is the president's budget, not your budget. matched by equal dollar increases or program integrity measures, for common sense loophole closures including targeted reform insurance

programs. program integrity investments across a range of programs and closing carried interest loophole, which we haven't talked about since 2006, and i yield back, mr. chairman. i am really getting tired to hear this redo every time we meet. >> mr. chairman, i yield to have minutes. >> mr. chairman, i ask unanimous consent that the article i have distributed to the committee from the seattle times from the 28, of march, why washington performed after loss of mandates. the inserted in the record. >> without objection. >> this reminds me that those who cannot remember the past are doomed to repeat it.

unlike many of the affordable care act repeal bills we voted on over the past two years, this one is only partially dismantling of the law. most importantly, it leaves in place a guaranteed issue, rich requires insurers to cover all americans regardless of their health status while he keeps in place the most important consumer protection, it also repeals the individually shared responsibly provision, which mandates that all americans maintain minimal essential coverage. i can't help but wonder if the republican colleagues checked with the insurance companies before they thought of this idea because if they had, they would hurt in no uncertain terms that this is a recipe for disaster. i know this firsthand because of what happened in my home state of washington. in 1993, when the washington state legislature enacted unambitious healthcare reform program that closely resembled the horrible care act and included strong consumer protection such as a ban on medical underwriting and guaranteed issue requirements were all insurance companies. these provisions were paired with mandates that included individual purchase coverage that business cover their

employees and this created a delicate balance that insured consumers were protected from abuses by the health-insurance industry and that the industry could spread risk broadly across the entire population. but, when the republicans took over the legislature in 1994, they repealed the individual mandate, which we are doing today while leaving in place the popular consumer protections including guaranteed issue, which we are doing today. this led to a statewide catastrophe. without the individual mandate, consumers had no economic incentive to enroll when they were healthy. instead, they would simply wait until they needed care to buy coverage. this led to a death the spiral in the insurance industry. across the state, premiums skyrocketed, you were an fewer comedies offered policies and my 1999, the individual insurance market was dead. you could not buy a policy. washington learned the lesson

the hard way. e sibley cannot require companies to cover people without an individual mandate. the reconciliation bill we are doing ignores this fact. we-- all of us know this will never become law, what we are doing here today and in the future i encourage my republican colleagues to look to history before wasting any more time on bad bills like this one. i yield back my time. >> thank you, mr. chairman and i yield to have minutes. >> thank you very much for yielding and for your leadership on this committee. judging by this reconciliation bill, it seems once again our republican colleagues failed to realize the american people do not want to shut down government over women's health. yet, they once again put forth legislation that attacks women's health and the a formal care act. this reconciliation bill once again would be fun planned ahead for one year preventing millions

of women from accessing critical help services such as cancer and sdi screening and construct-- contraceptive care. it would also prevent states from using federal funds to reimburse certain providers simply because they provide services-- abortion services as part of their practices even if those services are provided outside of their participation in the federal healthcare program. that outside of their participation. this means the federal payment under program like medicaid and the maternal and child health services would immediately be disrupted leaving countless low-income women and women of color in the cold. these family plan programs are critical to reducing unintended pregnancies and they make economic sense. for every 1 dollar spent on family planning services we save more than 7000 and other cost to read the claims our republican colleagues that these women can go to other community health centers that receive funding in this reconciliation bill, that claim has not been-- this is

been discredited by public health officials and it's downright false. we would be sending women to providers who we know would not have the capacity to meet the needs created by eliminated funding for family planning in other women's healthcare providers. although, planned parenthood centers make up only 10% of all publicly funded planning centers, family planning centers, they serve 36% clients who obtain care from the family planning center network. we know that planned parenthood centers are essential to the health and well-being of women and their families. in 2013, alone planned parenthood provided healthcare services to more than 800,000 californians in my home state and provided more than 93000 pap tests and 97000 breast exams. denying access to healthcare providers such as planned

parenthood and other social safety net providers will hurt women who need the services the most. again, low income women and women of color, so we need to call this reconciliation bill what it is, yet another ideological attack on women's health. you won't support conferences sex education. you won't support bailey planning. you won't support contraception and you don't support a woman's right to safe and legal abortions. what do you support for women? instead of undermine women's health, full range of reproductive health and services we should be working to replace the damaging sequester and work towards a responsible long-term budget deal. i urge our colleagues to reject this underlying bill and i yield back the balance of my time. >> thank you. i now yield to an half minutes. >> thank you for that time. a lot of us will go home today and one of the things i look forward to is going home and seeing my dog.

i think i have a picture-- there he is. that's one of his favorite toys. he has that canine single-minded obsession with returning that tori to me every time i throw it. no matter how chewed up tickets are wet it gets he will return it it seems like just about no matter how many times i throw it. but, even he probably wouldn't bring that back to me on the 61st or 62nd time because he knows at that point it's pointless. the bill we have before us is exactly that. it's pointless. it will never become law, but it does show the priorities of the majority party. that you would increase the number of uninsured people if you repealed affordable care act and likely raise premiums and take away the ability to not have pre-existing conditions and all the other factors there and i think something we have to learn from perhaps the presidential race on both the sides whether you watch donald trump and ben carson or sanders

on our side is they are largely running against us, the way we operate in washington. the way we don't operate in washington is largely the message that is appealing to the public because they are tired of our inability to get together and actually have a budget process with appropriation bills like it done and we don't shut and governments. somehow the people within the beltway on the majority party don't understand that. i would just hope that as we look at something like this, that will clearly not become law, but once again would show you are going to repealed without replacing the affordable care act and millions of people would lose access to healthcare and once again put us closer to government shutdown is absolutely not with the public wants. if you are looking for a speaker candidate, he is available, but he comes at a high price. i will yield back my time. >> mr. moulton, two and a half minutes. i yield to mr. moulton.

>> thank you. thank you mr. chairman. i would like to start my time with the definition that we attribute to one of america's greatest scientist, albert einstein. einstein said, insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. if einstein were alive today, and he could witness the debate we are having on this reconciliation proposal he would be able to see his definition of insanity in action. we are here today to debate and vote on a bill that would do the following things: attempt to repeal, defund or otherwise undermine the affordable care act for the 61st time despite it being upheld by the supreme court. attack, get again, the right for a woman to choose where she receives her healthcare. avoid, get again, the misuse of

abuse of the overseas contingency operations fund, which in last year's house budget report the majority stated was quote a backdoor loophole that undermines the integrity of the budget process. therefore, it baffles me that at a time when we should becoming together to negotiate a plan to replace the damaging sequester and avoid a government shutdown, we are here debating a highly partisan proposal that will likely draw challenge in the senate and ultimately be vetoed by the president. what's the point? americans would be better served instead of wasting our time on the futile crusade, republicans would join democrats in crafting a bipartisan deal that could move our country forward. and avoid yet another government shutdown in december. i yield back.

thank you. i now yield two minutes. >> thank you very much for yielding and i went to address the planned parenthood issue for a minute because we did this at the energy and commerce committee and i think they're important points to be made. one, if this congress had disagreed with the issue of fetal tissue research, then they probably wouldn't have authorized it about 20 years ago. if congress wants to reconsider that decision as to whether fetal tissue research is appropriate or not, we should do that. but, we should not throw the baby out with the bathwater and that is a pun that is intended. 97% of planned parenthood clinics don't do fetal tissue

research, don't make tissue available for fetal research and i'm a former board member planned parenthood in my district. my clinic in louisville, kentucky, it doesn't do abortions, so what this provision would do to my district is basically deprived by thousand people a year of the healthcare. i know the argument is they can go to community health centers. our community health centers already have waiting lists. those 5000 people would have nowhere to go, so let's talk about the issues separately. this bill really in its impact is to deny importance basic healthcare to literally millions of women throughout the night-- and men trupp united states. if you want to debate fetal tissue research let's debate as separately, but let's not deny health care to millions of women because of that. i yield back. >> mr. chairman, i just want to ample fight on that and i mentioned earlier the statement that was made on a national television indicating after its investigation he found there was no evidence that planned

parenthood had broken any laws. he was just asked and made a statement yesterday at a judiciary committee where he said and i quote did i look at the finances having aced herein specifically as to the revenue portion and how they spend, yes. was there any wrongdoing? i did not find any. so, this whole creation of special committees is clearly another witchhunt. we saw what happened with respect to benghazi. there were committee hearings in the house and in the senate and the defense committee here, the intelligent-- intelligence committee. all of them looked at that very tragic, awful situation in benghazi and found a wrongdoing. so, what did we see in the house? when you didn't get the answer that you wanted politically, you created a special committee. the majority leader of the house adjust recently said on national television, you know, that

committee did its job. it brought down hillary clinton's poll ratings. we achieved our political results. spending $5 million in tax money , taxpayer money on a political witch hunt and this planned parenthood special committee is the same thing, again. all of the committees of this house have looked at it as have many states. conclusion? they didn't break the law. no wrongdoing. what do you do? create another special committee to look for a lyrical answer that you want that is not bear. so, i would end these witchhunts. this really is, mr. chairman, this effort to repeal the affordable care act. you know it's not going anywhere. the president will veto the bill carried the effort to go after planned parenthood again will not be successful. no finding of wrongdoing, so what we really should be focused on is the business before this house and that will be the

subject of my next motion, so thank you. >> the house budget committee wound up approving the budget resolution on a partyline vote, 21-11 and a just a few minutes we expect to hear from house democrats on the export import bank and minority leader nancy pelosi and others will bring the reauthorization of the bank up for a vote. democrat remarks are excited to start in about five minutes and house republicans met in another closed-door meeting this morning to continue talks on the process of selecting the next speaker of the house. as lawmakers headed into the meeting reporters asked questions of some of the potential candidates. here are some of the comments they caught as lawmakers passed by. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

>> i have nothing new to say. [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible conversations] >> when do you think you might make an announcement?

[inaudible] >> when do you think you would make an announcement? >> are you considering a run for speaker? [inaudible] >> when will you make your decision? >> i don't know. [inaudible] >> the republicans closed-door meeting lasted about an hour. we will show them coming out of their meeting to read several lawmakers answered questions from reporters and we will start with trigg county of south carolina, but also to let you know that in a couple minutes we expect to hear from house democrats on the export import bank. minority leader nancy pelosi and others expected to talk about

the discharge petition, a way to bring a bill out of committee and on the floor for consideration without a report from the committee. democrats want you to bring that reauthorization of the export import bank up for a vote and they are expected to speak a couple minutes away from now. again-- again, republicans coming out of their meeting earlier today and we will watch as much of this as we can before the democrats hold a press conference. >> what was the note you left for paul ryan today? [inaudible] >> what was in the note? >> he is a good friend. >> do you support him for speaker? >> he's not a caidate. >> if he were to get in? >> 100%. >> direct the pressure is on you right now. >> the pressure is on me that i am going to be late for a meeting. >> no pressure on you to run?

>> what the going to take to get paul ryan to be a candidate? [inaudible] >> is this just about his wife and family? >> when you say just about, come on, man. that's pretty important. just about family. >> what happens next? >> there will be a new election. >> what would it take to get you >> the voice of god. >> do you want to the job? >> no. >> does anyone? >> we will find out. i think paul could get everyone. [inaudible] >> potentially a candidate. >> you will have to ask him. [inaudible]

.. >> --or party needs to hit rock pocket. what did you mean by that? >> [inaudible] >> we're going to take this at a slow pace.

>> people in there during the break, and trying to figure out what we need to do to get this country moving. >> do you think -- >> have impact -- >> i would hope not. i mean, how can words asking for integrity create so much trouble? i don't think so, to be honest with you. >> [inaudible] >> not yet. >> -- when roughly. >> i did not. >> ryan -- >> people talking about an affair with kevin mccarthy. >> then, their decision to interpret that way, this is something that i think is important to the american people, and anybody in leadership, male or female, should be a man or woman of integrity. that is nothing personally about anybody. >> but that's kind of an sewages. when you reference -- what is he talking about? >> i was here at the time and it was total chaos here.

i don't want to see that happen again. >> that's the room just now members urging paul ryan to run? >> no. no. nothing about the next speaker or anything. it's about taking this in a slow way, and see if we can find common ground, and that's going to be what we need to work on, and change the rules and things like that. that's the kind of stuff. >> what's your favorite -- >> just going to be who is electing the speaker. >> is that okay -- >> i think so. >> how come those -- >> i think right now we need to -- [inaudible] >> unless you can get it right. [inaudible]

>> still committed to making this happen before the end of the month. members are going to go home and visit with constituents, and that's part of the process. we'll have additional candidates who nor afraid of competition. i always argue there should be more competition, not less. the most important decision in the house of representatives so i look forward to actively be campaigning. >> [inaudible] >> like i said, i bring all the challengers -- put myself out there and do that and come -- >> they can do that, do it. >> are you -- >> i think the speaker made the right decision. it caught everybody by shock and surprise, and those are the rules and the speaker can postpone it. >> -- interim speaker.

>> i didn't hear any of that discussion. >> retreat of -- >> have been clearly he would be somebody that i would support, i would love it if he did it. >> would you drop out? >> he has been a drum beat in saying he won't do it. >> would you drop out -- jive paul ryan got in race of course i'd support him. part of the reason i got in the race is because people like paul ryan weren't stepping up so. we need have some slugs. i just thought of myself as part of the solution. >> would you drop out if paul ryan -- >> i would support the nominee. >> run against him? >> no. i would not run against paul ripe. -- paul ryan. if paul ryan gets in the race, i would support paul ryan. i hope he would do it. but he has consistently said he won't, but we have get to somebody who actually wants to do and it will fight for and it make the most of it.

maybe his approach changes, but he is certainly in my mind, the most qualified person to do it, and i hope he would do it. >> have you talked to him today. >> no. haste seen it. >> does speaker babier still expect to step down by the end of the month? >> he wanted to get through the process before the end of the month. i got markup. aim glad you're going to come to it. it will be a great one. >> 'right side, please. thank you. [inaudible] >> -- talk about this -- >> i didn't hear that today. >> all kinds of -- expert on the rules. i'm not saying -- issues like two-thirds vote to get to the chair. all sorts of issues like that we heard discussions about.

-- [inaudible] the nominee conference on the floor. i'm not suggesting that's a good rule but those are the kinds of ideas below discussed. >> among the candidates mr. chaffetz said he would pull out if mr. ryan got in. is there anybody -- could be mr. ripe or step up themselves. >> i don't want to step up for other members. apology ryan is thinking -- paul ryan is thinking about this but the bigger challenge is not who we put in the speaker's chair. the issue is how to change the dynamic and no matter who we put in that chair has to figure out a way to change the political dynamic. that a much harder question, and anyone who is thinking about becoming the next speaker understands that instinktively. >> you're not sure if paul ryan can change the political dynamics. >> i don't know anyone can right now. >> we're going to take you live to the u.s. capitol. minority leader nancy pelosi and others about to expect about the

export-import bank. >> good afternoon, everyone. i'm honored to stand here with our ranking member on the financial services committee, with two champions for the xm bank and getting the job done for the american people to, to create jobs for the american potential, congresswoman gwen moore of wisconsin, and congressman denny hect of washington state. this is a very important day because we have broken thr the wall of obstruction in the congress, again to get the job done, in a bipartisan way. which is what we all come here to do. the ex-m bank is about small si, businesses thhout ourou, benefiting from our opportunity to reach markets overseas.

every country, every big trading country, has the equivalent over an ex--embank for us to have ours not authorized and funded is to thigh the hands of american business as we try to expand our exports and, again, increase jobs and paychecks in the united states. so, it's really quite an important day. i commend the republicans who put -- came forward and signed the discharge petition. i -- the leadership for enabling this to happen but i'm particularly proud of the work done on the democratic side to amass, what, 176 signatures, and more. they just cut it off at 218. essential to all of that was the work of the office individually speaking to members and a larger sense leadership that was

provide on this issue, inside and outside the congress. our ranking member on the financial services committee received kudos galore from the business community for the roundtables and sessions she held and for her persistent dissatisfied excellent advocacy for the xm bank, and our two colleagues, gwen moore and denny hect, were rerentless. denny hect got signatures in less than one day, less than 24 hours, he was able to amass the signatures of when we were collecting signatures for such legislation. but with great pride and admiration for the work done with the whip operation on behalf of american workers if yield to mr. hoyer, who has been a champion of, make it in america, and let's export it to the rest of the world. >> i watch to -- as the whip,

the best whip in the house is nancy pelosi. and we work as a team to get this down to support maxine waters, begin moore, and denny hect, who has been an extraordinary champion of export-import bank. as leader pelosi said, and tom donahue of the chamber of commerce said, if we didn't do this it would be unilateral disarmment. it would be saying to the rest of the world, you're going to be able to compete and we won't. when we last worked on this in 2012, mr. cantor and i, ms. waters, ms. moore, denny hect, we got over 300 votes. what today showed was when we worked together, when people are allowed to express their will, we had 42 republicans sign a discharge petition. this fifth discharge petition -- i'm told. i haven't looked this up but

it's the fifth since 1930. over 85 years. only five of these have been signed, and enacted. so that now on october 26th, we will be able to consider what i think is a bill to make america more competitive as the leader said, to be able to make it in america, and sell it here, and around the world. so that's what this day was about and i congratulate my colleaguing this was a success, and success has many mothers and many fathers so we're very pleased today. this was a victory for america. not a victory for party. but a victory for america and a victory for american workers. so i'm very pleased now to yield to the ranking member hoff in the financial services committee who has worked tirelessly on this effort, along with gwen moore and denny hect, maxine

waters of california. >> very temperature much, denny hoyer. thank you for the very kind introduction but really i want to thank you for the years of leadership that you have given to the reauthorization of xm bank. you have done a fantastic job, and i have certainly appreciated working with you as we worked to make sure that we did not lose this important resource in this country. and for leader pelosi, i have never seen anyone so determined, i've never seen such advocacy. she believed when some of it started to believe -- not to believe, rather, she believed that we were going to finally get it done. so this is a big tribute to her today that we found ourselves in this extraordinary historic action to discharge this petition, have this petition

signed, and discharge this legislation. and so denny hect, and gwen moore, who serve on the financial services committee with me, have worked very hard. they have not only joined with me as we have done roundtables, but they've been out in their districts, working with all of those businesses and suppliers to the big businesses, that depend on xm bank in order to create the kind of jobs and provide the kind of supplies to these businesses. ladies and gentlemen issue want you to know i found myself working with everything from the chamber of commerce to ge to the manufacturers association, and organized labor, what a combination. we all understood the importance of jobs, and all understood the importance of being able to support our export industries.

well, we had a lot of things to overcome. and i have to tell you that the chairman of our committee was determined that this bank would not be reauthorized. even though there were many members on that side of the aisle, who believed that it should be reauthorized, and really wanted to do it, and thank god mr. tenter and mr. lucas step up to the plate and held the hands of members who really wanted to do it but maybe felt a little intimidated, and they came together with us, and you see what happened here today. they joined with us in signing this petition to get this bank reauthorized. i'm so proud of the work that we have done, but i'm more proud of the fact that we're going to help keep those jobs in our districts and across this country that have been generated because of the support of the xm bank, and so we leave here

today, we leave here today, feeling very good as we go back to our districts and as we travel across the country, to say despite the fact there were many obstacles in our way we have gotten it done thus far, and i look forward to the final vote that is already been taken on the senate side, and all we have to do ills just -- is just take our vote on this side and off to the president's desk and we'll have reenergies of the xm bank. thank you. -- reauthorization of the xm bank. >> please, i meant to -- congresswoman gwen moore but let me bring her to the microphone because she played such an important role as a member of the financial services committee. >> thank you so much. ranking member waters. i've learned so much under your leadership. i want to thank nancy pelosi and mr. hoyer, mr. hect, and i am so in awe of this breakthrough and

this historic moment when we have been with so much chaos going on in this building, to once again be able to demonstrate that democracy does work every once in a while and this is one of those occasions. we were fortunate to be joined by 40 -- i would say 42 -- courageous members of the majority who under many threats for their own political and career well-being, stepped up to break through some of the do-nothing attitude that we have seen here in the capitol. to really sign this discharge petition and to solidify their beliefs in creating jobs. the export-import bank is a job

creation engine, and we had already seen the adverse impact from it not being re-authorized. right near my home in -- which she also signed the discharging petition -- we saw g.e. lose 350 high-tech manufacturing jobs directly because the export-import bank was not reauthorized. not to mention the tremendous supply chain that affects folks in my district in milwaukee, which still relies heavily on manufacturing for its economy. so, it's not just huge corporations. you heard boeing and g.p. mentioned but it's company like maxum in my district that have 30 employees, and this company has done work on the panama canal, and they have

subcontractors, a company down the street from them in milwaukee, with four employees, that really relied on the export-import bank. the ceo of maxum looked me in the eye and said, without the export-import bank i cannot do what i do for my 30 employees. this is not g.e. or boeing. it is really unacceptable in a global marketplace for the united states to disarm and we are so happy today that we were able to make this breakthrough. maybe it's the beginning of a new tone around the capitol. >> amen. >> and let me just say, none of this really -- i can tell you that the person who has really hit the streets and has talked to everyone, even people we knew objected to the export-import

bank -- here's a guy who would talk to them anyway and that is mr. denny hect from the state of washington. so pleased and proud to call him colleague. >> thank you. thank you. it's been a pretty tough couple of weeks around here. and yet in the midst of that i can look you all in the eye and say, what you saw on display today was the best of the united states house of representatives. think about it. leadership. the stead fast strong, unbelievable committed leadership of the people behind me, including the leader, including the ranking member, including the whip. leadership. bipartisanship. this was a republican discharge petition, and it's the first one to be successfully brought to fruition since 1986. this is a once in a generation thing. this was a bipartisan effort. bravery. my goodness. the bravery of steve fincher and

frank lucas. you all read the news reports. they were threatened with their political lives the minute this rumor got out. it took courage for them to do that. creativity. now, i'm not going to bore any of you with the details, but if you really fully understood the brilliance behind the whip's machinations here before the all the steps involved and the timing you would be blind build the light. you would be beliedded by the light. and lastly, the hard work. frankly, i'm a worker bee in this deal. i'm proud to have been a buck private in this army and to do what i could. so really the question is, why? why is this that thing that brought all those elements forward? why is this a once in a generation thing? those elements, leadership, creativity. bravery, bipartisanship, work, that all at play. but what is at play is what is behind it.

what is behind it is the most important thing we do. which is that which we took help create good, paying jobs for americans. as teddy kennedy once saidbe social program you can heaven is a good good-paying job. no. important think we can do for america and that's what the export-import bank does. i'm humbled to be here today. thank you. >> i just want to make -- excuse me. go hide. >> i just wanted to say that when i came on the floor today, leader pelosi said, you will be number 218, to put it over. don't call me maxine waters. call me 218. >> and that's the point i wanted to make. >> i'm better than a ten, right? >> congratulations, maxine waters on being 218. and that's the point. denny referenced it. this was not about whipping to

convince members because our members have long been supportive of this. mr. hoyer said over 300, practically every -- except for one, we could only identify one so we say maybe, but we but the wonder was to get people to be here on a friday, on a getaway day, and be here on time. we had more members who wanted to sign but once you get to 218 they kit off. so our number is bigger than that. but the mastery of today from the whip's standpoint was that people were here and they stayed and they signed up, and they found out that they had come sooner they would be within the 218. so, congratulations on all of keep government open omnibus we're working on and hope to do before december 11th to remove all doubt we'll honor the full faith and credit of the united states of america and we'll keep government open, we'll create jobs in our transportation bill,

and also we do so, we are going to also pass a 9/11 health bill to not only on 9/11, sing the praises of those who were so courageous but after that to meet their need biz passing that legislation once again, and hopefully in the very strong bipartisan one. any questions? >> how -- speaking of deadline, how are you preparing for these deadlines given the great uncertainty about who will be leading house republicans? >> right now we have a speaker, and we have been -- like i said yesterday in our press meeting there, we -- our deadlines coming up, the committees of jurisdiction, the senate has acted. the committee of jurisdiction in the house is working on a transportation bill. we hope it is something that will meet the needs of the american people and not make matters worse because it's too meager, but be bold enough and fiscally sound enough to take us

toward creating jobs and promoting commerce and doing all the things a transportation infrastructure bill is designed to do. full faith and credit of the united states, we want to remove all doubt. just the thought of it before lowered our credit rating. we can't go to that place again. and win the omnibus, the committees of jurisdiction are working on the actual dollar amount we will have once we know what the pay-forwards are and a discussion of know surprise when it -- no surprises when it comes to policy and moves they want to put in the bill, any riders. so everybody is working in their own piece of it. and hopefully all of this will meet the deadline. hopefully the republicans will come to terms as to who their recommendation will be for speaker, but that's really up to

them. >> let me just reiterate what the leader said. we have a peeker. and the speaker of the house has said he doesn't want to see the government shut down and doesn't want to see the debt limit compromised. i would hope and expect and believe, and i think today was an indication of that -- that this speaker wants to make sure that before he leaves, america is well-served by his leadership. >> -- the democratic caucus? >> excuse me. >> ever -- >> no. you haven't and you won't. >> some republicans said they're open to the idea of democrats helping them elect the next republican speaker. >> why don't we just wait and see what they do. as i said yesterday when hey said, tell us what you think and how you'll work with kevin mccarthy. i said when they act, in their caucus, and they elect a speaker on the floor, we'll talk about how we will work toth nor good of the american people in a

bipartisan way. >> we democrats are unified that we will certainly accept their support of the next speaker, nancy pelosi. so it goes both ways. >> back on xm, do you have any guarantees from the senate on xm? they passed the amendment but they're saying they won't take up the -- what kind of conversations are you having with and what is the outlook there? >> well, let me just say that this is the bill that we are discharging, and so i do believe that we can feel comfortable that they will take up the legislation. it's the same legislation basically they passed. >> they just said they won't spend the time -- >> i think they will. i think the will. >> they didn't expect what was happening today to happen. they really didn't expect that we would have a legislative approach that would be successful. >> i talked to senator murray just about an hour ago.

brought her up to date on where we are and the work of denny act and maxine were doing to get this done, and she is going to be working very hard. i know with denny hect and others, to convince mcconnell that as -- i want to make it very clear what the ranking member waters just said. what this rule provides that we're just discharging is for the bill that got 64 votes on the floor of the senate so that this is not a bill that has not already passed the house -- i mean the senate. it has. now it was attached to the defense bill so it's not the same so it went go directly if we pass it. won't go directly to the president, but it is the bill the senate has already passed by almost a two-thirds vote and i would certainly hope under those circumstances, senator mcconnell would take it up, rafaelizeing that 64 of his members, as you saw 218 with the 218th stand right here, said

this is critical for jobs in america, and i hope that senator mcconnell, under those circumstances, would facilitate bringing a bill that has already passed the house with almost two-thirds to the floor. >> speaker pelosi one candidate that has been discussed i chairman -- to be speaker of the house and representative hect alluded to the historic nature of this. he criticized republicans for putting forward this discharging petition. i'm wondering if you can speak to the chairman's leadership and what about the nature of a tea-partiy to work to allow the discharge -- >> let me thank you for asking about the xm bank which is what we're here to discuss, and this is something that cannot be ignored. as i said yesterday, when they choose their nominee for the floor, and they elect a speaker, we'll be happy to work in a bipartisan way to find common

ground. it's up to them. it's not up to us. >> thank you. >> i basically said he had put obstacles in our way. he did not believe in it. he believed the bank should be killed. but he did not have the support of all of the members of his committee, all of the membered of the conference and that's why we are able to do what we are doing today. we know he does not like it, he does not wish it to be reauthorized but we're passed that now because we have gotten this discharge petition signed by 218 members members members . >> it will come to floor the 26th. >> let's be clear. this is nothing new. ranking member waters meeting on flood control insurance, meeting on terrorism risk insurance, beat him on his gse reform.

she is four for four. i am not worthy. >> just let me say, democracy is messy, but it's just the best system that we know, and it works. one person cannot stop the momentum of the majority, and this was a real tribute to democracy. >> thank you. >> thank you all.