our budget is the answer to this looming crisis. and with a complete and full repeal of the president's health care law couples with a strengthening of medicare's grn tee. house republicans are advancing patient-sceptered health reforms that simultaneously move us towards a balanced budget and a stable financial future. we tackle the fiscal challenges facing our nation and do so without taking money out of the pockets of hard working american taxpayers. i'm honored to wreeyield the remainder of our time to miss diane black, who will also discuss the health care issues. >> thank you, chairman price. let's start out with a couple of simple facts that i think no one in this room can or should ignore. first of all, we have 10,000 baby boomers added to the roles each day.

now the medicare budget offices have been ringing the alarm bell about medicare's dwindling finances, and we must act now. we cannot continue to ignore the facts. over 46 million americans right now rely on medicare for their health care. we must protect and preserve medicare for both our current seniors and our future generations. and unfortunately the president's budget proposal failed to address medicare's grim future. now instead what we have on the books now is a 15-member board charged with cutting costs and denying care to our seniors. independent advisory board establishd this the health care law would cut physician payment rates, forcing many doctors to stop seeing medicare patients.

and this makes it harder access, not easier and puts them between patients and their doctors. it saves medicare for future generatio generations. but it takes the power away from the government bureaucrats and puts them where it needs to be empowering patients with greater choice. this plan for medicare is based on bipartisan proposal that does three things. it does not make any changes for those in or near retirement. it offers guaranteed coverage options to our seniors. again, guaranteed coverage options for our seniors. increases the cases and three, is financed by a premium support payment that is suggested to provide additional financial assistance to those who have a

lower income or are less healthy seniors and less to the wealthy. the medicare plan including a traditional medicare option would compete against each other to offer higher quality care at lower costs. so the choice is clear. we can continue to stick our heads in the sand and support the status quo, which just hurts seniors through denial of care and bankruptcies medicare, or our plan to save medicare and provide more choice. for me, the choice is clear. and i yield back my time. >> if i may, just 30 seconds. i think it's important for people to appreciate. and we're going to hear a lot of things from the other side. there are three points on the issue of health care that i want to close with. first, our budget includes a guaranteed option for seniors. secondly, it's voluntary for the senior to select the health coverage that's best and right

for them. whether traditional fee for service medicare or whether it's spg else they desire. and third, it's bipartisan. so it's guaranteed. it's voluntary and it's bipartisa bipartisan. >> a person cannot be a denied a plan if they choose it, regardless of their health plan or income. in fact, what we're saying is, if you're a lower income individual, you'll get a complete coverage. as you get sicker, you get more coverage to make sure your payments, your premiums don't go up, and yes, if you're a wealthy individual, you will not be subsidized as much because you have the ability to subsidize yourself more. that's what we're doing. this idea has bipartisan roots dating back to the early 1990s. this idea was the product of the clinton 1999 commission to save medicare. this idea has been talked about for a long time as the best,

most humane way to save the medicare guarantee. and if we stay on the status quo, which the president's budget changed the status quo, then we will see not only medicare going bankrupt. we will see the promise of medicare being violated for current seniors. and the way it will be violated will be up to the 15 people the president will appoint to this board where they make the decisions. at the end of the day where do you want the power? in the hands of the beneficiary or in the hands of these 15 political appointiees? >> members of the health budget committee earlier today bading and marking up the republicans 2013 budget proposal released yesterday morning by paul ryan, who you saw last there. we're showing you portions while

committee members are attending a series in the house. the house mainly working on a bill repealing certain provisions of the health care law. general debate on the bill will fill out the afternoon today. amendment debate and final passage expected to take place tomorrow. while we wait for members to return, more debate from earlier on the republican budget proposal. it's just under 15 minutes. thank you. the federal budget is a state of values and priorities every year. it certainly is this year. we have to put forward a budget that ensures we can meet our obligations, reduce the deficit and grow the economy. first we must commit to reducing the nation's deficit in a balanced and fiscally responsible manner. this means spending cuts as well as revenues to den sure we

sustain steady, economic recovery. demanding greater efficiency from all sectors of f the government is necessary. both cuts and revenues must protect and grow a robust middle class, insent vise small businesses and domestic manufacturing and eliminate unnecessary and costly tax deductions. second, we must make investments to build the economic competitiveness. this includes investments in education, to ensure a skilled workforce, and instruct to build and improve roads, highways and rail and in basic research, new technology and innovation, the essentials of a growth economy in the 21st century. and third, we have to meet our commitments as a nation to our kmirn and to our seniors by protecting benefits and beneficiaries under medicare and medicaid. the republican budget fails to meet all the essential goals. it fails to protect the middle class. it fails to protect our seniors.

the fact is, this budget undermines the nation's historic commitment to the seniors by ending medicare as we know it. republican plan changes medicare from a system of guaranteed benefits and ensures a coverage for all americans to a voucher of limited value. this republican budget like last year's shifts in recent costs to individual beneficiaries. and does nothing to address the causes of growing health care costs. so as costs rise, it is seniors who will bear the financial burden, and our frailest, sickest seniors. the results will be devastating. it does no have the to be this way. the republican budget chooses to end guarantees while protecting tax rates for the wealthiest. they choose to shift rising costs to individual seniors rather than focus on all seniors and all americans. let's be clear, the budget

reduces benefits. we should tackle the rate of growth in cost for seniors and for medicare by focusing on delivery and payment systems and getting greater value for the dollar and focusing on prevention and primary care, which this budget repeals. medicare is a promise to all american seniors, and the republican budget breaks the promise and risks the health and economic security for the seniors. we'll have more discussion on how to modernize and strengthen medicare and medicaid without breaking the promise to our seniors. and with that, i want to yield three minutes to kathy caster. >> i thank my colleague. clearly democrats and republicans have different visions for america. the republican vision is bleak. it is very harsh. just sense the republican budget

was rolled out yesterday independent commentators have called it reverse robin hood. they've called it extreme. they've called it disturbing. and there's no better kpamp of that than the republicans' assistance that the promise made to generations of americans that is medicare be broken. medicare is that fundamental promise that has served us well for more than 45 years that if you work hard all of your life, you pay into medicare, you play by the rules, you are going to live your retirement years in dignity. you will not go bankrupt. your family will not go bankrupt because you have some diagnosis or chronic illness. i think medicare is one of the initiatives that makes america great. but unfortunately the republicans do not share that

view. let's talk about specifics in this budget. i know the republicans like to say this isn't going to affect anyone for many, many years. in fact, what it does is it rolls back many of the improvements that we adopted two years ago. and it does, in fact, cut medicare benefits currently available. second, it will increase premiums and out of pocket costs. it ends guaranteed coverage. that guaranteed coverage that our parents and grandparents have paid for. and it puts them at the mercy of private insurance companies. what it also does is it scraps all of that important work and cost savings and reform that we accomplished two years ago that is at work now, bending the cost curb. and in fact, when you look, when you compare private insurance companies and medicare, it's traditional medicare that has a better result an saves more money. so, in contrast now, i think the

americans, you need to ask the republicans here in congress why. why are you cutting medicare? why is it more important when you're cutting medicare to protect corporate tax subsidies and loopholes, such as those for big oil? why when you're cutting medicare is it more important to increase the tax breaks for millionaires. why when you're cutting medicare is it important to shift the burden to middle-class families. i think the bottom line is we have got -- we've got a fight on our hands. and if we're going to keep the promise of medicare, if you value it as a fundamental promise to allow retirees to live their lives in dignity, then reject this republican plan. this is an important american value. and it's absolutely worth fighting for. i'm happy to at this time, yield

my time. >> thank you, mrs. chairman. mr. chairman, i have to start by saying this. this is a political document. every budget that's ever presented by the democratic party or the republican party or the know nothings, it doesn't matter. this is a political document. as much as you are saying it's an economic document. which partly it is. for the last 30 years you've sold us, tried to sell the american people, economics that prioritize corporate interests in the wealthiest amongst us over the middle class. our most vulnerable citizen seniors. you're comparing this budget to the president's budget, which is 13% lez for veteran who is put their lives on the line every day, and you pat them on the back at best. we got what we paid for, the worst economic crisis since the

great depression. i'm happy you introduced this budget. i'm happy to run against it politically, economically, any way you say it. you handed it to us. it defines our battle. enough of bipartisanship, you're saying. and i couldn't agree more with gentleman from oklahoma. he's probably not here now. it's time that we came together. this document in is not any manner, shape or form a reaching out. it's a reaching back. it didn't work then. it's not going to work now. you think we have learned from the mistakes. instead, the budget doubles down on those failed policies of providing money to the very wealthy in the multinational corporation, disguised as tax reform. that's the best one yet. you must have worked hard on that, by using deficit reduction as a reason to eliminate investments in the future. cutting education when you compare the two budgets that we already know about right now by 33%. we say investments in the future.

you must have skipped over those pages. i have reviewed and support the democratic amendments. they start to fix this mess this budget would create. first i can't reiterate this enough. in regards to the chairman's charge that our side doesn't have the courage to aproef entitlement reform, you didn't read the health care bill. health care reform was entitlement reform. one-third of health care reform. i suffered through the ways and means committee. all of that. i had to read those pages. let me tell you something. one-third of it devoted to medicare and made kad. read it. it's the reform. in fact, those folks in charge, the trustees of medicare just made the statement that it's substantially proves a trult of the affordable health care act. time is up. okay. i'm just getting started. >> very well done.

thank you. and at this point i yield six minutes. >> thank you. i would like to commend my friend for holding true to the principles of agricultural reform. i hope this is something the committee can spend a little time on. i think the direct payments, i think the opportunity for crop insurance, this is something that maybe the committee could get behind and do something to deliver. but in the main, i must take exception to my good friend, the ranking member, who talks about our friends in the majority, making the wrong choices. because other than the egg, you made no choices. i don't think it takes much courage to say that you are going to, on the hard issues, you're not going to make any tough choices for the most fortunate and the most powerful. you're going to reduce their taxes.

and turn around and reduce medicaid for all our states that are in a downward spiral, that that's going to be reduced 45%. or 19 million people cut back on food stamps. that didn't take much courage. and it's ducking the issues, in my humble opinion. when i look at the medicaid cuts, i wonder. don't you talk to constituents who are going crazy right now because of the pressure on medicaid and what the states are doing, and you would retreat from that. over the course of the next ten years, now, mr. ryan actually was pressed okay. you're going to cut the tax rates for the most fortunate, and for a lot of other people. but it's going to be deficit neutral. you're going to raise 18, 19%. how are you going to do that? not a clue.

there aren't enough loopholes, tax reductions, without impacting the things that our constituents rely upon greatly. like the home mortgage deduction. you go through the list. how are you going to come up with the money to make this deficit neutral? mr. ryan wouldn't say in the press conference. they're going to leave it to those on the weighs and means committee. >> well, with all do respect, that's no much of an answer. you don't have a clue about how you close is that $6.2 trillion gap. except you're going to hammer -- >> a portion of the health budget committee earlier today.

you can see it on the website. we're going back live to the markup of the republicans' 2013 budget proposal. >> thank you. i was over an appropriations meeting. so i missed the first vote. it would have been a yes for that. amendment number three, which i would offer. >> the amendment offered and related to transportation. staff provide the $50 billion

that we need to be able to make sure that we're not going further. and whether you talk to. there's a vast a ray of people. here in washington and meet you in d.c.

and looking forward going from here. i sincerely hope that we can approve the senate bill that gives us some breathing room and gives us some certainty as we go into a construction cycle. we'll have a chance to maybe vote on that lirt. but in the meantime iz offer this as what toy to fill a serious gap in the bill, produced bipartisan support, and give people at home what they need. and at this point mr. chair, i would recognize my friend from kentucky, mr. yarmouth for a minute and a half. he's become rhetorical.

there were 80,000 vehicles a day, some hours out of their way to conduct commerce. mr. young is very much aware of the impact that had on our district. this is a situation that is potentially repeated to hundreds if not thousands of clients across the country. this is a way to put tens of thousands of americans back to work for all of them. that supports 278,000 jobs. this is money and jobs that can immediately stimulate our economy and accomplish something that is critical to the future.

the economy in my district is based on distribution and logistics. ups' global hub is there. all this depends on instruct. and our country cannot survive without making the investments that would be facilitated by this amendment. i urge to adopt the amendment. i yield back. >> mr. chairman, if i could, i yarmouth just mentioned, we also need to look at safety issues. i know there are more than 450

structurally deficient bridges just in the state of oregon. let's think of what we can do nationwide. finally the united states is far behind too many other in this case nations in the percentage of gdp spent on infrastructure. it's time to step up. we can do that and create jobs by supporting this amendment. and i yield back any time. >> thank you. your kmeents and i appreciate your support. the $50 million dollars as you look at the amendment before you be help cover the gap that we have in terms of the next fiscal year. it would continue for 2014 and 2015. it would help us get through what is truly a crisis. and not the deficit. i suggest that failure to do this gives us really a choice.

because if we don't do this it's going to be like sgr and the alternative minimum cap. when push comes to shove. we're really not probably going to shut down construction activities in this country. i truly think we will meet our obligation. but we'll be doing it, adding to the deficit. adding to the deficit. this is a way to do it honestly. to be able to give them the certainty that they need, people who are largely, almost all of this work is contracted out, the small and medium sitzed businesses. and it supports family wage jobs. my friend was anything too conservative. the $50 billion here with a conservative multiplier means a million -- over a million family-waged jobs over the next couple of years. i strongly urge my colleagues to

look at this amendment. i hope you'll support it. america deserves it. >> thank you. time for the gentleman has expired. i now recognize mr. lank ford for ten minutes for purposes of proposing the amendment. >> i would like to recognize for three minutes. this is insol ventd in the days to come. it's underfunded. i completely agree with that. we've had great conversations already about that. we have been overspending. that's been a fact. it's been supplemented by the general fund. for a while. we recognize that. we have multiple issues here. solvency, we have to resolve that. projects have to be done. infrastructure is essential for our commerce and is a responsibility that we do have as well. that's why this process sets up a reserve fund. similar to what we're proposing to say we need to find a way to set aside an account, b