>> and c-span continues its live coverage of the house and the health-care legislation that was passed earlier this evening. in case you're interested, there is a full vote break down on c- span.org. the vote was on h.r. 3590, the health-care bill. that bill will go to the president for his signature. now, the other bill, 4872, that goes to the senate for more deliberation, so that is how it breaks down. the numbers are up on the screen if you want to participate and tell us what you think about the house passing the legislation. these are the numbers. let's hear your voice is. betty in terre haute, indiana,

hi. thank you for holding. what do you think about all of this? >> a lot are concerned about what to do about what we already have. for instance, my has been toward his 39 years, and, of course -- my husband worked his 39 years. we are just wondering where to stand there, if anything changes. >> have you heard the thing you are looking for? >> no. my husband has alzheimer's. none of us are spring chickens here. >> betty, are you happy with your medicare? >> yes, i am. >> ok. >> i could not ask anything better. like i said, we are just on the line right now. we do not know what to think about where we stand.

>> all right, thanks for calling in. thanks for watching c-span. our next call is from florida. >> hi, my name is montez, and i am calling because i strongly support the plan. i have personal experiences. i became ill and started paying a lot of money for cobra, and then i could not pay for that. i applied to a health company to get insurance, and they rejected me. >> has it been costly for you? >> extremely, but then, your money runs out, and there are people that are saying that this is a bad thing, and they are people with money, and there are people who are saying they are not sure is a good thing.

people do not know. i have worked as a nurse, and i have seen people turned away because they do not have health care. something is better than nothing. >> all right, thank you for your comments. missouri. >> hi, i am strongly opposed to the health-care bill. it is in back room bribes, and we're going to end up with high taxes. we're going to have approximately 17,000 irs workers. what are they going to do? are they going to try to seize our homes if we have one because we have not paid? maybe we have been a day late and paid? there are a lot of things wrong with this health-care bill.

we need reforms. i support reforms, but not this. this is horrible. >> betsy, do you currently have insurance? >> i do, through cobra, and i have at different times in my life not have insurance, and i have racked up a big medical bills myself, and i have had no money and have had to pay these of myself. i do not have a lot of money. i welcome reform, but not this. this is not a good bill >> -- not a good bill. >> sharon, what are your thoughts? >> january 1, all of my copay went up.

as of january 1, i have to pay $100. the insurance companies raised everything before this came out. they were hoping that this bill was not going to come out. now, i hope that republicans do not come out and say -- it was because of this bill. this bill has nothing to do with it. january 1, 2010. >> have you been following this whole process? >> i have. the republicans have been lying to the people. when they are in office, they have been taking money, getting paid to do nothing for over one year. they are drawing money for false

pretenses. >> all right, we got your pint. -- point. ok, bunker hill. are you there? all right, let's go to detroit. undecided. what do you think of this process, robert? we will never know because robert is gone. we are going to try to in illinois. go ahead and tell us what to think of this process. -- what you think of this process. >> talking about the bills, the procedures, and if they do watch more news, -- >> tim, why are you supporting the bill? is there anything you think that needs to happen?

>> i am on disability now. i have had surgery is. -- surgeries. i had it for two years, and now, my wife and daughter -- i am on medicare now. we cannot spend of $1,000 per month for my wife and daughter for an insurance policy. i am and fixed income also, and i lost a six-figure job, so there is a lot going on for a lot of people. there are a lot of people. >> ryan on our washington, d.c., . what do you think? >> i think everybody believes we need health-care reform in this country, but this bill is the wrong way to do it. it pays for this new entitlement with a bunch of gimmicks.

they are counting that ensuring that medicare's solvency, and there are putting in a bunch of new taxes. this bill is just the wrong way to go about things. we need to step back and start from scratch. >> ryan, what do you do? >> i am a college student. >> where do you go? >> american university. >> and are you covered by your parents still? >> yes. >> have you talked to them about this? >> yes, and they share my view. >> thanks for calling in this evening. thanks for watching c-span. jane, and decided, huh? -- undecided. >> yes, this was a gift to insurance companies. there are too many uninsured people in this country.

this does nothing for the people who have insurance or who die in do not get medical care because the insurance refuses to cover it. right now, ok, i i'm on disability, too, and i still not -- cannot get all my prescriptions covered or what my doctors say i need because they say, "no, we will not pay for it." so this bill does not cover enough. that is why i am sort of for it and against it. >> all right, ann, you are our last voice tonight. please go ahead. >> i have insurance and very good insurance, but i highly support this bill, because there are so many people to do not

have it, and when all of these people get ill, what is the country going to do with all of these kill people? thank you. >> well, as regular viewers of c-span know, we have been covering this issue for well over one year, all the congressional hearings, everything the president has said -- what are we going to do with all of these ill people? we will continue this conversation on health care tomorrow morning, but everything that we have covered is available on our health care hub. good to c-span.org. it is right there front and center. -- go to c-span.org. you'll be able to see it at c- span.org. earlier tonight, about 45 minutes ago, before the house democratic leadership spoke, the president spoke, and we want to assure you that now in its entirety. we do we want to show you that

now. >> good evening, everybody. tonight, after nearly 100 years of talk and frustration, after decades trying and a year of sustained effort and debate, the united states congress finally declared that america's workers, america's families, and america's small businesses deserve the security of knowing that here in this country, neither illness nor accident should endanger the dreams they worked a lifetime to achieve.

tonight, at a time when the pundits said it was no longer possible, we rose above the wake of our politics -- weight of our politics. we did not give in to mistrust or to cynicism or to fear. instead, we prove that we're still a people cable of doing big things and tackling our biggest challenges. we proved that this government, and government of the people and by the people, still works for the people -- a government of the people and by the people. i want to thank everyone who stood up with courage and conviction to make health-care reform a reality, and i know this was not an easy vote for a lot of people, but it was the right thing to do. i want to thank nancy pelosi for extraordinary leadership.

steny hoyer and jim clyburn, getting the job done. i want to thank my outstanding vice president, joe biden, my wonderful secretary of health and human services kathleen sebelius for work on this issue. i want to thank my many staffers in congress and my of incredible stat in the white house. you have worked tirelessly over the past year for americans of all walks of life, a reform package finely were the to the people we were sent here to serve. today's vote answers the dreams of some many who have fought for this reform. every unsung american who took the time to sit down and write a letter or type at an email, hoping your voice would be heard, it has been hard tonight -- heard tonight. to the untold numbers and knocked on doors and make telephone calls, with a firm conviction that change in this

country comes not from the top down but from the bottom up, let me reaffirm that conviction. this moment was possible because of you. most importantly, today's vote answer the prayers of every american who has hoped deeply for something to be done about a health-care system that works for insurance companies but ordinary people. for most americans, this debate has never been about abstractions. the fight between right and left, republican and democrat. it has always been about something far more personal. it is about every american who knows the shock of opening in on velotta and seize their premium had shot up when times are already tough enough. it is that every parent who knows the desperation of trying to cover a child with chronic illness only to be told in no again and again and again. it only to be told know. it is about small business owners who are forced between

insuring employees are staying open for business -- parents trying to cover a trial with chronic illness only to be told no. it is a victory for american people and for common sense. it goes without saying that tonight's vote will give rise to a frenzy of analysis. there will be tallies of washington winners and losers, predictions about what it means for democrats or republicans or my poll numbers for my administration, but long after the debate fades away and the prognostication fades away and the dust settles, what will remain standing is not the government-run system some feared or the status quo that serves the interests of the insurance industry but a health- care industry that works better

for the american people. if you have health insurance, this reform just gave you more control by reining in the abuses in the insurance industry, when some of the toughest consumer protections that have ever been known. if you do not have insurance, this gives you a part of the big purchasing pool that will give you a choice and competition and cheaper prices for insurance, and it includes the largest health-care cut for working families and small businesses in history, so if you lose your job, if you change jobs, start that new business, you will finally be able to purchase quality affordable health care and security and peace of mind that comes with it. it this reform is the right thing to do for our seniors. it makes medicare stronger and more solvent.

it will reduce the deficit over the next decade by more than $1 trillion in the decade after that. this legislation will not fix everything that ails our health- care system, but it moves us decisively in the right direction. this is what change looks like. as momentous as this day is, it is not the end of this journey. on tuesday, the senate will take up revisions that the house has increased, and this is provisions that have strengthened this law and removed things that had a place in it. -- that had no place in it. it is time to bring this debate

to a close and go about the hard work of implementing this properly on behalf of the american people. this year and in years to come, we have a solemn responsibility to do it right. nor does the state represent the end for our country. the work of revitalizing our economy goes on. the work of promoting private- sector jobs goes on. the work of putting american families' dreams back within reach goes on. and we marched on with renewed confidence, -- we march on, energized by this victory. in the end, what this represents is another stone from the late for the american dream's foundation. today, we answered the call of

history as so many generations before us. when faced with crisis, we did not shrink, we overcame. we did not avoid our responsibility, we embraced it. we did not fear our future, we shake it. thank you. god bless you, and may god bless the united states of america. [applause] >> >> tomorrow, a staff reporter discusses congressional legislation designed to overhaul the government's student loan system. a law professor talks but efforts to block the insurance requirements in the health-care legislation. arizona senator john mccain will discuss health care, immigration reform, and politics, and john

morton explains the role immigration and customs enforcement plays when it comes to border control and fighting terrorism and has the latest on the drug war in mexico. washington journal is live on c- span. >> mr. speaker, on this historic day, we open these proceedings for the first time to televised coverage. >> 31 years ago, america's cable companies created c-span as a public service. today, we have expanded access to public affairs, multiple platforms, television, radio, and online, and the latest gift, and extensive video archive. c-span's's video archive. >> anti-abortion house democrats were joined in announcing support of a health-care

legislation that came after president obama had plans to issue an executive order, ensuring things. this news conference last about half an hour. >> we are going to begin. thanks for coming. thanks for joining us today. the reason why it wanted to wait is because it's important because the agreement we have been able to reach, standing on our principal of performing the sacredness of life, would not have been done without the support of the colleagues with me today and our west virginia colleagues. i am pleased to announce we have an agreement, and with the help of the president, there is the sanctity of life in the health- care reform. we have all stood on principle. this is a principle we have

stood forward from when we first -- we do not want any public funding for abortion. we expect in language to apply throughout the health-care bill. we wanted to see health-care reform, but this meant more to us than anything, and you have to continue to be more principal -- the moral principle of protecting unborn children. this is a sacred promise. i am pleased to say, we have. the president has announced he will be signing an executive order. that executive order will be signed after the health-care legislation as it refers back. this is to reinforce the principle belief that we all

stood on, no public funding for abortion. there has been some questions raised by different groups, that in the health-care reform package, somehow, someway, abortions to be performed at community health centers. the president's order makes it very clear that will not happen. being appropriated for the centers, that is not possible with this executive order. there were concerns in this legislation that those who might have religious or moral objection for a facility run by, say, an association would somehow be coopted or the art -- their values be changed. the president makes it very clear that it will always be

available, and it will be enforceable, but the real victory year or the real winner is really the american people. 31 million more americans will have health insurance. we will no longer be able to resell and insurance companies on the wind of insurance companies, and pre-existing things will no longer disqualify you. we will not need americans to go into bankruptcy because of health-care. all of the accomplishments that we have, and in this executive order, and extensive executive order, would not have helped and what -- happened without the help of my colleagues. i would like to thank mr. waxman, steny hoyer, most importantly the president, my staff, and my michigan staff,

and i would like to thank those who have been helping us out with love and support. there was someone who was receiving calls for me while i was here in d.c. hopefully, we will get back to normal life style, but i want to thank my colleagues. they stood strong. i am so proud to be with them. i will now turn it over to someone for a few words, and we will take some questions. >> it is really a great privilege to join with all of my colleagues today, and i thank him for being a great captain of our team and reaching an agreement is significant for every person.

what we move forward today is actually a bill about life, life for all american families, including women and children, and no longer will any woman have to wonder whether she can bring a child to term because she cannot afford it. the provisions in this bill that have to do it maternal health care, child health care, preventive care, the adoption credits that were included in the bill, it takes us to a new day in america. it is just so profound to be part of a moment when we truly move america into the 21st century. we find that the abortion rate goes down significantly. would not be wonderful if in our

country, no woman ever had to face the decision of abortion? i think that what we have done through this bill and this executive order is to establish a platform under all of america's families, to give them peace and security of a future where they do not have to make choices, and i just want to say to all of my colleagues, it was a joy to work with them, because we know what we're doing. we are being a voice, as the march of dimes tells us, for over half a million children who are born with a low birth weight, many with deformities, because the mother said never received the care during their child-barry period, and that is going to change with this bill. i know speaking with president obama, as all of my colleagues have, he is a very good father and husband, and he would wish

that for all. we want to thank him for his leadership on this issue, and we want to think again congressman stupack. i also want to thank my dear colleagues from the state of ohio, someone from cincinnati, who has stood tall as a father himself, a good father, all of the american children and families, and to some other congressmen, and i think some are even grandfathers at this point. thank you for this great day. >> well, i want to think the effort of the entire group who is assembled and for some others you are not here, and as marcy said, i am a father, and one child is in college, and it is nice to know that as soon as he graduates, he can stay on the

family health care until he gets established, which is great, but this bill is about life. this truly is about preserving the sanctity and assuring the sanctity of what we are about here, and i could not be prouder of these folks. what we have accomplished today in this bill is obviously historic. it is enormous, but what we have accomplished with this piece of it and with the executive order is something that will resonate across the nation. we democrats profoundly value life. >> i just want to reiterate what has been said. first of all, i do want to thank the congressman, who really was our leader in this effort, and all of my other colleagues behind me, and even some who could not be with us right at this moment. i also want to thank the president of united states, who listened to us and hurtñi our

concerns and helped us to find a way to make sure that this legislation is a whole life piece of legislation. when i ran for congress, just a couple of years ago, i called myself a whole-life candidate. this also includes health care and education and have a good job opportunities for people, and so, this legislation is, i concern, -- we are not only worried about abortion and making sure that there are no federal funds for abortion, but we are also extremely concerned about young women may find themselves in situations, college students, young teenagers, women from abusive families, will also be included in a piece of this legislation that is going to go out to support them as they struggle and a very difficult time in their lives, and i say this as a person who was there. .

abortion is a very emotional issue. we come together in this historic legislation. what we're doing today is certainly the most pro-like most, i believe in my 34 years of congress, that i have seen. we're talking about not only the unborn but the uninsured and the underinsured. you put the unborn all along with the 30 million uninsured

americans that will be covered by this legislation, and that is why i call it the most pro-like piece of legislation that i will vote upon in my 34 years in this body. i salute bart stupak and the college behind me. i salute the president for truly being open and listening to pro-life issues, listening and taking in the fact our concerns and acting on them. it is a great day for america. it is a great day for the unborn and the uninsured. >> i am from cincinnati. i am proud to be a pro-like legislate or and i am proud to cast a vote today in favor of a strong pro-like bill that is about health care reform, about ensuring the uninsured, and standing up for the unborn.

the president took a small step to date. the president will be listening -- releasing the text of an executive order which is sweeping. it clarifies for all that this help bell does not provide public funds for abortion. that was critically important to all of us. to make sure that that was crystal clear to the american people. and with this executive order, it will be clear to the american people. i join my colleagues in thanking bart stupak and all of the pro- life democrats here as well as others and our caucus, and thanking the president, to ensure that all americans understand that this bill is about the sanctity of life, it is about preserving life, and moving forward. thank you. >> thank you, bart. i want complement barred stupak

for his strong suit pants for the unborn throughout this process. everyone standing here embraces the purposes of this legislation. this is for all americans, addressing the very difficult thing -- the situation of preexisting conditions, people not having health care and a modern society. and at the same time, we are pleased that it reduces that health care cost curve, which this legislation does. what concerns us all along was the issue of federal funding of abortion. this legislation -- the senate legislation goes a long way and that direction, and the president's order is going to go further. we of work intensely for this last week and getting this on the president's desk to reassure and affirmed that

federal funding for abortion will not be a part of this legislation, growing out of this legislation. we are achieving a lot of purposes here, and health care reform, are all the stated reasons are desperately needed in this country, and at the same time protecting the unborn in ensuring that federal funding for abortion is not part of this legislation. i think we have gotten absolutely as far as we could go in this legislation. >> thanks, again, to all of my college. the executive order the president has put out -- we're very pleased with this order. we're glad to be a part of it. >> does this put you over the top now? >> we're felt -- we are well

past that. >> how do you know that this executive order will not be rescinded after the fact? >> the president plans to keep it in in its enforcement. when you talk about the act specifically prohibiting the use of tax credit and cost sharing production credit to pay for abortion services. we have assurances from the president and from others that he will not risk this up tomorrow. he said himself -- the president said when he addressed the american people that there would be no federal dollars for abortion. the american -- the president has put his committing in writing and he is put further commitment to community centers no ambiguity that may be in there, and also what conscious clause that got left out in the senate language.

-- conscience clause that got left out in the senate language. [inaudible] >> correct. [inaudible] >> the act specifically prohibits the use of cost reduction payments in the health exchange that will be operation and -- operational in 2014. >> what made you decide that an executive order would work? >> this group, we met constantly, and this group we laid out proposals and legislative process to address the concern. the problem we kept running

into in the senate and the senate rules, there is no doubt that if we tried to put abortion policy into the reconciliation package, the policy is not a budgetary concern, therefore it would be cut out because of the byrd rule. when the senate attempted to put the stupak amendment into the health-care bill it would only get 45 votes. our difficulty -- we would all love to have a statute. it would be stronger. we cannot get 60 votes in the senate. the reality is we cannot do it. this bill was going to go through. i do believe that they had the votes even before we decided to vote for this legislation. therefore to protect the sanctity of life, what was our best, and forcible -- remember, executive order has the same force of law, and therefore it

was the executive order that the president extended to us today. i will also and fault -- i will also be in a colloquy on the house floor. this is something that we all fought for -- the sanctity of life. this is so there is no ambiguity in this bill. [inaudible] i think we're pretty darn close to getting to 16, yes. -- 216, guess. i do not know. we had so many proposals going around. [laughter] >> the statutory language, we would love to have it but we cannot get again. we are not giving up, ok? i don't think we missed anything, but if we did, we are coming back with legislative language.

we carry the right to life ball throughout this whole debate and we will continue to do that and work with our colleagues to get the job done. [inaudible] >> what else is in that? a motion to recommit, especially from the other side, they have many things in there that i totally disagree with. this one at least covers 31 million americans. i would vote against it. just that? that would be a great day. the bishops want statutory language. i know it is lent, but come up with some way to get the 60

votes and that would be great. we would all like something stronger. we play with the hand that we are dealt. an executive order has the force of law. [inaudible] [laughter] [inaudible] >> because of the courage of these members here, we pushed on with the stupak language, the language in the senate under ben nelson, it give him credit, it was better than what started. and now what the final bill plus the executive order, make no doubt about it, there will be no public funds for abortion.

obviously leader boehner, that is not true. anybody one add something on that? [inaudible] >> we're all up late last night working on the spirit there was a proposal couple of days ago that did not do anything for us. yesterday's we really got into some good hard negotiation. they were getting close to 216 but not quite. we entered into a tough negotiations and finished that this morning. we went back for a couple of changes. it is just been back and forth, back and forth. the white house called us this afternoon about an hour ago and said that the president has agreed to sign this once they health care bill passes. we will sign it.

that was sort of it. >> there are others that are not here. an indiana congressman could not be here. there are two or three others that have been in and out of the room. on their side, there has really been about at least 10 at one time. and let me just say one thing. someone asked me earlier what mike doyle be so emphatic and they thought it was a heated exchange. it was our lineup for baseball team that we were talking about. mike doyle, something's got critical and he was the liaison between the white house announced. he deserves a lot of credit. he -- we asked him if he wanted to come and he said no. so doyle was part of that group.

he was with us at the table all the way. no, he is not with me. no, i do not mean to be flippant. dan pop than one-third twice and for the long negotiations, he was not there. it would have asked mr. le pen's. -- you would have to ask mr. lipinski. [inaudible] >> the best spoke directly with the president. there were conversations, but mr. bauer was the main negotiator for a spirit of our. -- for us. bob bauer. one more question and we will go. [inaudible]

>> i agree with the bishops that we would rather have the stupak language. the reality is that we cannot pass it in the senate. there is a lot of things we love to have his like 250 pieces of legislation sitting in the senate, but they did not pass it. we need both chambers to pass it and the president decided third we cannot get more than 45 votes in the senate. the bishops are right. statutory law is better than an executive order. we cannot get there. what do we have come and nothing? or you want the same executive order that has the force of law? it insures the enforcement implementation of abortion restriction, and under this act, it says, the hyde language applies.

it says that about four or five times. bishops, i agreed but in the legislative process, he did not always get what you want. we honored the principle that we all set for. [inaudible] i would like the statutory language. the reality is, i have 45 votes in the senate. i need 60. 60 on a motion to pervade -- to proceed, 60 on cloture, and 51 for passage. but do not think we're done. i like something statute torelli. -- statutory. i know the white house spoke

with the pro-choice caucus last night and went through it. are they extremely happy with it? nope. are they extremely disappointed? no. it has the full force of law. [inaudible] >> she is fine. we talked to her on the floor. especially democrats, we are not battling all the time. >> [inaudible] >> this is hyde. what did they said? let's keep the hyde language. no expansion, and a reduction. sometimes we did not hear each other speaking.

the president said no federal funding for abortion with the fascination. we've all been saying this -- keep current law, keep the hyde language. [inaudible] correct. [inaudible] say that again? [inaudible] no. congress passes laws and it is up to the president to implement them. this is our guarantee, and this is why we're having a colloquy today on the floor so that i informed that college -- the congress that the hyde language remains even if the law passes. you're going to see policy

mandans, straight compliance with prohibitions on abortion funding in a health exchange, you'll find some general provisions. section number to there. -- section #two there. no, it does not do the same way. mr. dingell had a piece of me yesterday for quite some time. [laughter] john dingell is one of my nearest, dearest, closest friends. i am glad for john dingell the have his day, and john dingell has been very helpful in keeping us all in communication and urging us to continue to make these discussions with the white house. is a fountain of knowledge and at times when it things -- like things would go by, mr. dingell

-- i kept them well informed of what he was doing and he kept me well informed of what i should be doing. [laughter] any other questions? thank you all. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> i don't know. you have asked him. -- you would have to ask him. >> following this news conference, a group of anti- abortion republicans spoke about how the executive order would have no legal effect on

restricting abortion funding. speaking first is congressman chris smith, who chairs the caucus. this is about half an hour. >> let me say how grateful we are for those who have stood up for all the sanctity of human life. what we are experiencing here in this legislation that has brought to the house, we're looking at legislation that contains within it the largest expansion of publicly funded abortions in history. in history. i have been here 30 years, i've been in the pro-life movement for 38 years, and this legislation massively subsidizes

and facilitates and expanded its -- expands abortion on demand throughout all nine months of pregnancy. i have read and i know my colleagues have well the executive order that president obama will put out. it has not been released yet. especially section two -- unfortunately obama care before the house, when it left the house, it had ironed clan, comprehensive language that precluded public funding in the facilitation of abortion. when it came back, and this was by design, not by accident, it was still riddled with pro- abortion provisions that were massively expanding abortion. the senate bill permits health care plans and policies funded with tax credits to pay for abortions, so long as the issue are of a federally subsidized grant college a new

congressional lead-mandated fee from every enrollee in that plan to pay for other people's abortions. rather than taxing everybody, the people enrolled in that plant will be taxed themselves -- so it is a subset, but it is a congressionally-mandated tax to facilitate abortion. you are in a small business, for example, and blue cross blue shield happens to be the provider for your employees and i have abortion on demand. it is being funded -- you would be hit by an new tax imposed upon you by this legislation per enrollee to pay for the abortions of all the other people inside of that plan. i read the barack obama executive order and all the ups and downs, this is how he will implement it. he talks about the segregation of funds. we've seen that gain, that trait, used over and over and over the years where they put a

pot of money here and a pot of money over here, and we just separate the fine somehow, that makes it ok. nothing could be further from the tree. money as possible. -- is fungible. mothers will be killed by abortions in larger numbers in this legislation, should be enacted into law. we call upon our republican and democratic friends to buy the sanctity of human life to vote no on this legislation. >> thank you. i'm jeanne schmidt from cincinnati, and i'm deeply disappointed to hear about this. simply put, an executive order issued by the president is not worth the paper it is printed on. it is not the law of the land. it can be rescinded in the blink of an eye by that jot of the

president's plan. some of the democratic colleagues on the other side of the aisle have already said that an executive order does not trump wall. this could be potentially something that will be changed the moment it is signed. it could potentially happen tomorrow, next week, next month, or next year, or whenever the president signs it, he could change his mind in an instant. especially when an executive order is designed by a president who has unfortunately a record of turning has backed on hard- fought pro-like principles. groups who have fought tirelessly for the rights of the unborn universally oppose this decision. among those most notably our the united states conference of catholic bishops and the national right to life committee. they have not bought this language. they disagree with it. they see its flaws.

they see its holes. i stand before you tonight to do the same, to fight for the life of the unborn, to oppose this agreement, and to encourage all my colleagues, especially my pro-life colleagues across the aisle, to reconsider their positions. thank you and god bless the united states of america, born and unborn. the bush i'm joe pets of the 16th congressional district of pennsylvania. from the pro-life perspective, i find absolutely no comfort in this executive order. if fate of the unborn into the hands of the most pro-abortion president in history. this is a career defining vote on the pro-life issue. either member of either party who votes for this bill will never, ever be able to claim that they have always stood for

the most important and fundamental all human rights. i congratulate the many pro-life democrats to continue to hold firm on principle, and who would join us in voting against this terrible bill later today. and i commend the u.s. conference of catholic bishops, the national right to life organization, and many of the other groups who have spoken out strongly with statements and memos against this executive order procedure. even debbie wasserman-schulz says that it cannot be changed by an executive order. the executive order cannot change the law. she said that earlier. i saw on television today. and so there are problems with this procedure. it cannot overturn the statute. it can be easily overturned by

court decision or revisited with another executive order. it is full of loopholes. nothing but a reiteration of segregation's of the funds, an accounting gimmick that we have discussed. there is nothing -- to apply the hyde amendment restrictions on funds that pay for abortions on demand. it does not do anything contrary to statute. i urge all my friends and the other side of the aisle to reconsider and to vote against this terrible bill. >> by large majority many americans believe that federal tax payer dollars should not be used on abortion. that has been for the last 30 years protected by the hyde amendment, and most recently, we had this debate come to the forefront with the health-care debate.

the stupak language, the stupak amendment that passed in the house made it clear that this would continue to be the law of this land, that federal taxpayer dollars could not be used for abortions. when the senate democrats' change that language, they knew it would make it much more difficult them get that language through the house. and yet they were willing to do that. the only way to really ensure that federal taxpayer dollars are not used on abortion is to defeat the senate health care bill in the house. and we continue to urge our colleagues to do that. >> as a courtesy to the members of the media, members are voting and will come back upstairs for question and answer an additional statements. -- and additional statements. let me say that this was a disappointing moment for millions of americans who chairs the sanctity of human life. and it is also disappointing

moment for millions of americans who understand that it is morally wrong to take that taxpayer dollars of pro-like americans and use it to promote abortion at home and abroad. while there has been great division in this country over the years on the subject of elective abortions, there's been overwhelming support in this country for prohibiting the use of taxpayer dollars to pay for and promote abortions at home and abroad. the legislation poised to pass the congress today it would for the first time provide public funding for elective abortions in america. and it is on that principle of long -- it is opposed on the principle on by an overwhelming majority of the american people. grateful for the stance that are pro-life colleagues on the other

side of the aisle have taken up to this day. they have been working to add the stupak-pets amendment to the bill to preserve 30 years of pro-life protection in the statutory law of the united states. but now remarkably several of our pro-life colleagues, remarkably, have decided to exchange 30 years of pro-life legislation for a piece of paper from the most pro-abortion president in american history. and nobody is buying it. and we urge our colleagues at this 11th hour in this debate -- stand on your commitment, not only to the rights to life, but

protecting the pro-life taxpayers in this country. project is political ploy that is the executive order. and stand with us and we will stand with you. we will ensure that any health care legislation contains the protections of the hyde amendment. an executive order, as debbie wasserman-schulz said this morning, an executive order cannot change the law, and she is right. the american people will not be fooled. pro-life americans will not be deceived. >> michele bodman. -- bachmann. this piece of paper is merely an illusory promise, one that ultimately will not stand. in fact, it may not even stand for a week. all we need to know is that the pro-life democrats -- the pro-

abortion democrats had no problem with this agreement, that is all you need to know. we were so proud of bart stupak and are pro-life colleagues on the other side of the aisle, that we are standing strong on this issue, many of us considered an important reason for being in congress. i think that is why we were also heart broken with the news came out today that part stupak had changed his mind. we talked to a lot of their regular american folks out on the lawn today, they were heartbroken, too, because they saw bart stupak is a hero for them, that he was willing to take a principled stand or light. and they were so grateful. and they were heart sick and said, tell us if this is true, and what we would like to be able to do is go back and tell them is -- that they have reconsidered their position and that they are going to stand

for life. because it ended the day, it appears that the very sad bargain has been wrought, one that will turn and fly in the face of the pro-life democrats. it appears that they will not be getting what they bargained for. there is no iron clad guarantee that they will three years or 30 years or 30 days from now or even three dallas for now that they would be able to hold onto a statute law -- law stands for something in our country. when you have law, if you can take that to the bank. but this is the rule of man, not the rule of law. they are very different. and that is why an executive order cannot tromp the rules of law. that is why we uphold the rule of law, what we venerate the rule of law, why we have had the obsession over the slaughter house rule, because law means

something. our names need to be recorded in the journal on how we've vote and an executive order cannot do that. the president is not congress. he cannot make a loss. that is congress' per view, not the president. we encourage your democratic colleagues to reconsider, think this through very carefully. today is a momentous day and this decision about to be made is an important decision that will impact at the lives of those yet to be born in the future. we know that if there is taxpayer funding of abortion, there will be a 30% more abortion, and i would agree if my colleagues -- no one on either side of the aisle can call themselves pro-life effort

again if they vote for this bill. it is impossible, because this will for the first time in the history of our nation, create a federally funded abortions. and so we reach out to our brothers and our sisters across the aisle, and we say, let's join hands as those committed to pro-life, and let's remain that way. thank you. >> there are several great questions in the pro-life area in front of the spirit the first is one that is greatly separating america. some people call it choice, others call it killing the unborn. there is a great divide on that subject. the second question is the one standing before us today. and that is, will even the people that talk about choice force those that believe abortion is killing, will they

forced them on to the power of law to pay taxes to support what they believe is in fact killing people? this is a dark moment for people who have a respect for life. it appears to be the greatest expansion of abortion rights in american history, since roe v wade. anyone who would trade protections of law for a vague promise which can at best on the last few years is making obviously a terrible trade, one that can never be pictured as pro-life, one that would never be viewed as prologue, one that will be viewed as the benedict arnold moment for pro-life. we strongly oppose using taxpayer dollars from taxpayers, many of whom morally and deeply opposed to abortion, and forcing

them with the power of government and the compelling force of the irs to kill the unborn children and take part in doing that. >> i think it was james agee that said that in every child that is born, to whatever parent, whatever circumstances, the potentiality of the entire human race is there. there are a lot of things about this bill that can be changed. if it passes, a cry of conservatives and republicans will be repealed. but it goes forward, there are many children that will die under its provisions. that will not be changed. nothing that i know more undermines the notion that this bill is about compassion than

the steadfast refusal of liberal democrats to keep us from putting an amendment into the bill that would prevent it supporting or finding the killing of our children. they tell us that this bill is about compassion. it is about helping us to catch have health care have the opportunity to have access to health care. there are so many ways to deal with that issue, but ultimately, if we allow a bell to turn a portion into health care and you of the undermined anything that could be say about compassion. when the sands of time blow over this place, and whatever enlighten generation looked back upon us, i think perhaps the greatest question will be, how did we treat each other? what was our commitment to those who could not defend themselves? we are about the face of vote, i

think, that will put names on that question. i hope the people to move forward on this vote will remember that in the lonely moments of an old age home, they may look like -- look back and wonder why was i not there for those who could not defend themselves when they need me the most? we have been through challenges like this in the past in our country. we fought great struggles within ourselves on what we would see -- would we see the image of god in our fellow human beings are cast them aside? i will leave you with abraham lincoln's words. he said, "fellow citizens, we cannot escape history. we of this administration in this congress, we will be remembered in spite of ourselves. no personal significance are insignificance can spare one or the other. the fiery trial through which we now past will write us down in honor or dishonor to the last

generation." this vote is about writing this generation down to future generations for honor or dishonor. >> my name is dan lungren. i'm from california. when i was attorney general, we handled 52,000 cases per year. i've argued cases before the supreme court and appeared before the california supreme court. i was the lead plaintiff in the parental consent case for california, american academy of pediatrics v. lundgren, the name to defend it in that case. so i have little experience in the case. there's an area of balal that an executive order cannot supercede. there's been a jurisprudence

growing in this country dealing with the hyde amendment and other provisions of federal law. it is simply stated that you have a program dealing with funding of medical procedures -- unless there is a specific limitation on the funding, it is presumed that there is a bright for that funding to include abortion services. -- that there is a right for that funding to include abortion services. therefore, 34 years ago, henry hyde put that amendment forward and house. i remember the battles that we had. not only in the congress, the house and the senate, in determining the language but and having it reviewed in the course throughout this country, the henry hyde language is settled law. for us to go around it, for us to eliminated, for us to ignore it as the senate bill does, is to open the door wide for the

legal propositioned by federal judges that there is a mandate that federal funds must be used for the performance of abortions. and the executive order promulgated by this president which is deemed to be contrary to the law contained in the senate bill will not override that, and people ought to understand that. it is important enough to be a concern in the senate bill, it is important enough to put it into law. the idea that we do not have enough time to work on it is nonsense. this is an artificial crisis created legislatively by the speaker of the house and the president of the united states, and to suggest that we cannot spend the time to properly protect the lives of unborn children is nonsense. the only thing i would say is that this is not about roe v. wade, this is about destroying the consensus that has

developed an been law for 34 years in this country. -- that has developed and has been balal for 34 years in this country. people on both sides have committed themselves to consensus for over three decades on the federal funding of abortion. but federal taxpayer dollars being used for the purpose of abortion -- this bill smashes that into smithereens. it basically takes everything we've done over these 30 years to create consensus and throws it out. and none of the rhetoric contained in other people's comments, none of the rhetoric contained in the president's executive order can change that. the law is pretty simple. but courts will read what a lot is. if they find an executive order that contravenes the law, the executive order goes out. this is less than nothing, because it claims to be something that is not, but it

gives people false hope in order to get a bill passed that will be the largest expansion of federal funding of abortion in the last 36 years. -- 34 years. [inaudible] >> on the catholic health care association, the sister came man who issued thursday but did not do with the concurrence of the member states -- the member organizations. there is already a large list of state catholic hospital association's that are affiliated with her organization, who have come out with an opposite point of view, saying that the pro-life language, the stupak amendment,

and that they are against this bill as it comes to the floor today. as the carpool -- the cardinal -- as heads of the catholic church have made very clear, including cardinal george, they do not speak for the church. speaker pelosi and i are both catholics. i did not speak for the church, and neither does she. she has no authority -- she speaks for an organization and as it would appear, a small part of that organization. frankly, i think it is moonlighting. i saw the clip on a catholic television program, that she was very much in favor of what the bishops was doing. that was months ago. now she has completely flip- flop, supporting a bill that dan lungren and my colleagues have said is the largest expansion of

abortion rights ever. and let me finish. in 1983, i wrote the federal -- she is. [unintelligible] they did not supported. >> there were 55 signatories to that letter. it does not represent 59,000 tons. i could go out within half a day and find 55 nuns who would disagree with it, at least. >> i think they are terribly misguided. we have been working with congressman stupak on this issue. it is what it is. frankly i am very saddened by the imposition. i read the executive order very carefully. section two which deals with big debts of this abortion expansion simply talks about how the obama administration will implement the same grit -- senate language.

as i read earlier, this language could not be more clear that it expands funding of abortion where it has not been before in terms of public funding and congressional remaned dated taxation of individual enrollees. i would also point out that i was the prime sponsor of an amendment that precluded funding for abortion under of benefits program. that was an to the first two years of decline administration. that language is clear that we will not even pay the administrative expenses of the plan or policy that includes abortion. on the the senate-passed bill, we now have an expansion and abortion funding that says that opm will now be administering most state plans, national plans, and they will include abortion.

it says expressly in the language of the bill that only one plant and a multi-state plan has to be bonafide pro-life. all the others can be pro- abortion, with full administration by a federal agency of the united states government, completely contrary to longstanding consensus on no facilitation, promotion, for funding for abortion. >> thank you very much. >> now was a health care debate moves back to the senate, you can find a wealth of information that c-span's health care hub.

riede the bills. read what members of congress are saying and join in the conversation yourself one twitter. you can also find hundreds of hours of video from the house and senate for debate, committee hearings, markups, and other events. c-span.org/healthcare. tonight the u.s. house of representatives approved the senate health care bill by a vote of 219-212. the reconciliation bill was approved by a vote of 220-211. here is that debate. c.b.o., this bill is $143 billion in savings in the first decade and more than $1 trillion of savings in the second decade.

we can add to those deficit savings real cost controls that bring down the price of the world's most expensive health care. take those into account says leading health care economist david cutler, and america saves an additional $600 billion in the first 10 years. and even more in the second 10 years. and yet there are some who hope for this bill's defeat. they would see that, i think, as the defeat of one party. one senator made that observation. and said this might be the president's waterloo. if this bill fails, the waterloo will be that of the people without health care insurance. the people who are struggling to make sure that their children are healthy and well and safe. but it would be a defeat for

them and for our country for a healthier america is a stronger america. they saw the same thing in 1993, my republican colleagues, , when to a person, as i believe will happen tonight, unfortunately, in 1993 to a person they did the same thing, my republican friends, voted without a single exception against the 1993 economic reform plan of the clinton administration. congressman boehner asked, and i quote, who does this spending stimulate except maybe the liberal faculty at harvard or berkley? congressman kasich said if it was to work, then i'd have to become a democrat. it did work and he didn't

change. it was a partisan vote, mr. speaker, a partisan vote that helped create 22.7 million jobs contrary to what so many of my republican friends said that bill would do. and a record budget surplus of $5.6 trillion. contrary to the assertion of mr. armey that it would create deep debt. that bill passed through a gauntlet of slurs, high hyperbole and untruths, and so did medicare which republicans called brazen socialism. and so did social security which republicans -- which a republican congressman called the lash of the dictator. i don't know whether there are

any republicans in this body tonight that believed that social security is the lash of the dictator. i hope not. those slurs were false in 1935. they were false in 1965. and, ladies and gentlemen of this house, they are false in 2010. ladies and gentlemen of this house, this bill, this bill will stand in the same company from the misguided outrage of its opposition and the lasting accomplishment for the american people. in closing, mr. speaker, i want to honor some of the little punk staffers. who gave so much to help us

bring this bill to the floor. i say to my friends on the other side of the aisle who did so much to bring your prescription drug bill to the floor, they need to be honored. they need to be thanked. they need to be respected for the work they do for this house, for each of us, but more importantly for america. from the legislative counsel's office, ed grossman, jessica shapiro, megan renfroe, larry johnston, henry chris to have, wade ba lieu, and scott proast. i also want to honor, mr. speaker, the staffs of the house committees on ways and means, energy and commerce, education and labor, rules, and the budget. as well as the staff of the c.b.o., doug elman dorf, phil ellis, kate massey, pete

fountaine, and the whole c.b.o. health care team along with tom and everyone on the staffer on the joint committee on taxation who contributed to their estimates. and finally, two remarkable staffers in my office. have made health reform the cause of their lives and just about every one of their waking hours for the past year. liz murray and ed lorenzi. thank you very much. mr. speaker, one of my staffers, my deputy chief of staff, has a 4-year-old daughter. she's a beautiful young woman. she's a smart young woman. her name is could he let -- collette. a few days ago a neighbor asked collette where her mom was. and i'm told that she answered,

she's at work making sure everyone can go see a doctor. thanks, mom. thanks to all the moms throughout america who when we pass this bill will have a greater sense of security for their kids, for their families, for themselves. i know this bill is complicated. but it's also very simple. illness and infirmity are universal. and we are stronger against them together than we are alone. our bodies may fail us. our neighbors don't have to. in that shared strength is our nation's strength. and in this bill is a more prosperous and more just future.

unfortunately much of this debate has been divisive. much of it has been irrelevant. we have seen angry people at the doorstep of the capitol. every president over the last century has said this is necessary for a great nation to do. my colleagues, how proud we must all be that our neighbors have elected us to come here in this, the people's house, to do this good work this night. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. the gentleman from texas, mr. barton, is recognized for 10 minutes as the designee of the minority leader.

mr. barton: i would like to yield the gentleman from alabama for a unanimous consent request. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. >> madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks against this flawed health care bill. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. barton: madam speaker, i would like to yield the gentleman from north carolina for unanimous consent request. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. coble: i thank the gentleman for yielding. madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks in opposition to this flawed health care bill. the speaker pro tempore: the speaker pro tempore: without >> i ask unanimous consent to revise and my remarks and objection to this flawed health care bill. >> i'll like to yield to the ranking member from georgia. >> he is recognized for one minute. >> i thank the gentleman for yielding. it's been said that the problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money. sp