no as many times as i possibly can today on what they are doing. i will make my decision. i support the walk off. i will make a judgment when the time comes. >> what is your message to republicans who are scheduling a vote to repeal the health care bill the week after? what is your message to them? >> first of all, i have not seen their hearings. have had hearings about the legislation that will come back a few days after? it will have a book to say, if you are a child that has been existing conditions and you can no longer be discriminated against, we will overturn that.

if you are 26-years old and younger and you are on your parents policy, pull the plug on that as well. they make their own decisions. it clearly points out that the law passed by the congress and signed by the president was up held by the supreme court. they are still fighting a fight. they'll be the handmaidens of the special interests in our country. they fight for the health insurance industry over and over again at the costs to the taxpayer. this is just more of the same. no surprise about it. it will be interesting to hear the argument. if it does anything like what mitt romney said this morning,

you cannot have it both ways. he will not be able to discriminate against someone with a pre-existing condition. the supreme court -- i do not know. maybe he will pay for the pre- existing costing out of his own pocket. you cannot have it both ways. this offers us get opportunity for clarity on what the bill is actually about instead of being at the mercy of $200 million negative campaigns and misrepresentation. some would call the other things. they put it out there to create extreme confusion. it is hard to talk about what the bill does. now we have a decision. they are talking about

overturning it. we can say with clarity, this is what the bill does. this is what they want to take away from you. this is how they will increase your costs. we will let the public decide. thank you very much. thank you. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> the u.s. supreme court has upheld all of president obama's health care law. it was a 5-4 ruling. the kept intact the individual mandate. states can impose taxes. we have heard reaction from

president obama and gop presidential candidate, mitt romney. house leaders nancy pelosi and john boehner. harry reid and mitch mcconnell. and from members outside of the supreme court. this was the scene outside the supreme court on thursday, just across the street from the u.s. capitol. president obama said the court's decision was a victory for all people. mitt romney said that those who want to replace the health care law will have to replace president obama. their comments are about 10 minutes. >> and good afternoon. earlier today, the supreme court upheld the constitutionality of the affordable health care act. it is the name of the health care reform passed two years

ago. the have reaffirmed a fundamental principle. here in america, the wealthiest nation on earth, no illness or accident should affect a family's financials. who won and who lost, that is how things are viewed in washington. that discussion misses the point. whatever the politics, today's decision was a victory in for everyone across the country whose lives will be more secure because of this law. this law has a direct impact on many americans. i want to take this opportunity to tell you what this means for you. first, if you are one of the 250 million americans who have health insurance, you will keep your health insurance. this law will make it more secure and more affordable.

insurance companies can no longer impose lifetime limits on the health care you can receive. they can no longer drop their coverage if you get sick. they can no longer a jack up your premiums without reason. they are required to provide free preventive care like checkups and mammograms. it is a provision that has helped millions of americans with private insurance. by this august, nearly 13 million of you will receive a rebate from your insurance company because they have spent to double much on c zero buses and not enough on your health care. and not enough on your health care. this provision has helped 6 million young americans. because of the affordable health care act, seniors have received a discount on prescription drugs. it has helped millions of

seniors. all of this is happening because of the affordable health care act. these provisions provide common sense provisions for american families. things did today's decision, all of these protections will continue -- thanks to today's decision, all of these protections will continue. starting 2014, this bill will offer you an array of affordable health care plans to choose from. each state will design their own list of options. this law allows them to do that. i have asked congress to help speed up the process and give states this flexibility in year one. once they have these exchanges,

insurance companies will no longer be able to discriminate any american with a pre-existing health care condition. they will not be able to bill you into bankruptcy. if you are sick, you now be able top-quality health care like everyone else. if you cannot receive the premiums, you receive credit that helps pay for it. today the supreme court upheld the principle that people who can afford health care insurance should take the responsibility to buy health care insurance. this is important for two reasons. first, when uninsured people who cannot afford private get sick and show up at the emergency room for care, the rest of us and that paying for them in the form of higher premiums. second, if you ask insurance companies and to cover people with pre-existing conditions, some folks might wait until they are sick to buy the health care

they need. that would drive up everyone else's premiums. that is why i knew it would not be politically popular. we included a provision in the affordable health care act that people who can afford to buy health care insurance should take the responsibility to do so. this idea has enjoyed support from members of both parties, including the current republican nominee for president. i respect the very real concern is that millions of americans share. a lot of credit of this health care debate has focused on a lot of what it means politically. it should be clear i did not do this because it was good policy. i did it because i believe it was good for the country. i did it because i believe it was good for the american people. there is a framed letter that hangs in my office right now. it was said to be during the health care debate by a woman --

it was sent to me during the health care debate by a woman. she was diagnosed with cancer. even though she had been cancer- free for more than a decade, her insurance company kept jacking up her rates, year after year. despite her fears that she would get sick again, she had to surrender her health care insurance. she was forced to depend on chance. i carried her letter with me every day in the fight to pass this law. it reminded me that americans across this country have had to worry about getting sick and the costs of getting well. she is well today. because of this law, there are other americans, sons and daughters, brothers and sisters, fathers and mothers, who will not have to hang their

fortunes on a chance. the highest court in the land has spoken. we will continue to implement this law. we will improve in areas where we can. we cannot go back to the way things were. today's's announcement, -- with need toannouncement, we move forward. we need to focus on putting people back to work, pay down our debt, and building an economy where people can get ahead. today, i am as confident that when we look back five or 10 years and now, we will be better off. we have the courage to pass this law and keep moving. thank you.

god bless you. god bless america. >> as you might imagine, i disagree with the supreme court's decision. i agree with the dissent. what the court did not do on its last of session, i will do on my first day if elected president of the united states. i will act to repeal obamacare. let's make clear the we understand what the court did and did not do. what the court did today was it that obamacare does not violate the constitution. what they did not do was say that obamacare is good law or

that it is good policy. obamacare was bad policy yesterday and today. obamacare was bad law yesterday and today. let me tell you why been i say that. obamacare raises taxes on the american people by approximately $500 billion. areacare cuts medicaire approximately $500 billion. those cuts and tax increases, obamacare adds trillions to our deficit and national debt. it pushes those obligations to future generations. americans will lose the current insurance that they have and like and want to keep. obamacare is a job killer. businesses across the country

have been asked about the impact of obamacare. thethree-quarters of them have said that it makes it harder for them to hire more people. obamacare puts the federal government between you and your doctor. for those reasons, it is important to repeal and replace obamacare. what are some of the things we will keep in place? what would be a real reform? we need to make sure that people who want to keep their current insurance will be able to do so. having 20 million people ought to that number of people lose insurance they want is simply unacceptable. second, people who have pre- existing conditions need to know that they will be insured and not lose their insurance. the also have to ensure that we do our very best to help each day in their effort to ensure that every american has access to affordable health care. we need to help lower the costs

of health care and health insurance. it is becoming expensive. this is a time for the american people to make a choice. you can choose whether you want to have a larger and larger government more interested in your life, separating you from your doctor, and having deficits passed on to later generations, potentially losing their insurance you like, or return to a time when consumers will be able to make choices as to what kind of insurance they want. this is the choice of the american people. our mission is clear. if we want to get rid of obamacare, we need to replace obama. my mission is that we do exactly that. return the american people to the privilege that they feel

most appropriate. we cannot pass on massive deficits and debt. if we want good jobs and a bright economic future for ourselves and for our kids, we must replace obamacare. that is my mission. that is our work. i am asking the american people to join me. if you do not like the course president obama has put us on, if you want a course that the founders envisioned, help us defeat obamacare. help us defeat the liberal agenda that mix government too bid and intrusive and is killing jobs across this great country. thank you. >> more reaction to the supreme court's decision on the health care law from house leaders nancy pelosi and john boehner.

>> good afternoon. pretty exciting day. the decision that was announced by the supreme court is a victory for america's families. it was a victory for america's families when we passed the affordable health care act la ad the president signed into law. millions are benefiting from it. young people, children, students can stay on their parents policy until they are 26. seniors are paying less on prescription drugs.

when the bill comes into effect, being a woman will no longer be a pre-existing condition. that is a victory for women. it is about wilmas. it is about prevention. health care.that -- it is abo it is pretty exciting. earlier i met with the caucus when a decision was announced. it was no surprise to us. we thought that we were on solid ground in terms of interstate commerce. solid grounds on terms of the constitution. it is only a question of what the vote would be. with that confidence, we happily embrace the decision that came down. we can move forward with the full implementation of the law. we can tell the american people the best is yet to come. i spoke to vicki kennedy before

coming here. i thanked them for a lifetime commitment to making health care a reality in our country. it was a great unfinished business of our society. i knew that when he left us, he would go to heaven and help pass the bill. now i know it work when this decision came down. it was inspiring, one way or another. now he can rest in peace. his dream for america's families has become a reality. i will be pleased to take any questions. >> president obama has set himself on numerous occasions that the individual mandate is not a tax. do you believe it is a tax?

>> the supreme court has upheld the legislation. i have to see the specific language of the identified with how we both the bill in the house as part of that decision. the documentation for the decision. call it what you will. it is a step forward for america's families. take yes for an answer. this is a very good thing for the american people. what you are talking about here is washington top. families -- washington talk. families with children with pre- existing children will no longer be discriminated against. not anymore. that is what is real important to people. technical terms. >> republicans said this raises the stakes for the election.

it brings clarity an opportunity for them. the thing they are a danger to the democrats -- do you think they are a danger to the democrats? >> i think we need to take a step back and ask, why then are we here? we are here to act upon our belief. it is a belief that many of us share. health care is a right and not a privilege in our country. we believe that the health care bill needed to be passed so that families would not be punished because it had a diagnosis or an accident. we believe it is about life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness that people can now pursue. it to pursue the aspirations depending on their talents without being a job-locked because a top has a pre-existing condition or a fear of the diagnosis.

they can be a writer. they can start a business. they can be self-employed. they can change jobs. this is about responsibility to reduce the deficit. if there is no other reason to pass the health care act and because of costs to families and businesses, large and small, costs to our economy and the terms of that being a competitive issue, and costs to the federal, state, and local budgets, then we would have had to do this. the politics be damned. this is about what we came to do. anytime you want to waste time asking, what does this mean in terms of the election? we undermine our purpose in coming here and acting upon our believe. we are very excited about this. it ranks right up there when

they passed social security and medicaid. now it is being upheld by five justices of the supreme court. >> just as often -- a chief justice roberts called it a gun to the head. why was this designed that way? >> with all due respect, characterization of it and he is -- here is what it does. we wrote this very carefully because again, we wanted it to have balance. we wanted it to have legitimacy and a well-received. what it does is it says for three years, states will receive 100% of the medicaid funding for this bill without any matching funds.

i do not think that is a gun to the head. further to the point, the house language has work clarity and in the original bill and it addresses that concern. under% of the money without matching funds as matching elements to it but not as far as expense and medicaid in this bill. i think that we are not bothered at all by the decision in regard to medicaid. it think that most governors would probably accept 100% funding without matching funds. >> are you going to be walking out on the house today? >> thank you firm opinion that up. -- thank you for bringing that up. i have a few things to say about that.

it would have been mischievous of me. you think it was a matter of mischief. it is no coincidence that this is taken up the same day the supreme court decision came down. it is too much of a coincidence. especially when the motion of contempt was only passed one week ago. what the republicans are doing with this motion on the floor today is contemptible, even for them. it is contemptible. the constitution tells the branches of government that they should work together and try to resolve differences without getting an upper hand are showing strength -- or showing strength.

there is an obligation on the part of congress, the house of representatives wanted to go forward was such a motion. trying to resolve it is not sending a bill to the floor of the house based on a false premise. this is not the truth is on the floor today. it was a false premise and asking for a boat. they tied to guns -- and asking for a vote. we had two employees at the white house. josh and harriet. josh was the keeper of the president's papers. for 200 days, we tried to get info from the white house. they stonewalled it.

once in and month out, the chairman of the committee and i and our leadership said, keep trying. we did not want to bring this to the floor again. we want to exhaust every remedy. that is not what is being done here. it is a railroading of a resolution. it is based on a false premise. it came to the floor of the house in a manner of less than two weeks for when we spent 200 days try to get word one from the bush administration. these people have gotten thousands of pages of documents. the documentation is from the attorney general. >> will you be walking off?

>> i am just saying, there is an attitude in our caucus that we should not on a process that is coming to the floor. i myself and then to stay long enough to vote no and then i will see what many in our caucus thinks we should do. i will honor the wish of my caucus. but i will be there long enough to make sure that the record is straight on what is going on. we are honored by the work of cummings. i want to be able to speak firsthand and what was said on the floor following this. this is not about anything other than they are trying to undermine the chief officer of our country, the attorney general.

it is the first time in the history of america that a cabinet officer has had a contempt of congress resolution on the floor against him or against her. i believe, as i have said from the start, it is their attempt to undermine his effectiveness and that of his department to address issues that are going on in our country that have many other complaints. they do not like the fact that he is not moving forward to descend the doma act. again, it is about a lot of things. that is why i say it is contemptible. in some circles, they would call it "lies." i do not like to use the word. it is abuse of power in the house. i will vote no as many times as i possibly can today on what they are doing.

i will make my decision. i support the walk off. i will make a judgment when the time comes. >> what is your message to republicans who are scheduling a vote to repeal the health care bill the week after? what is your message to them? >> first of all, i have not seen their hearings. have had hearings about the legislation that will come back a few days after? it will have a book to say, if -- it will have a vote to say, if

you are a child that has been existing conditions and you can no longer be discriminated against, we will overturn that. if you are 26-years old and younger and you are on your parents policy, pull the plug on that as well. they make their own decisions. it clearly points out that the law passed by the congress and signed by the president was up held by the supreme court. they are still fighting a fight. they'll be the handmaidens of the special interests in our country. they fight for the health insurance industry over and over again at the costs to the taxpayer. this is just more of the same. no surprise about it.

it will be interesting to hear the argument. if it does anything like what mitt romney said this morning, you cannot have it both ways. he will not be able to discriminate against someone with a pre-existing condition. he said he supports that. maybe he will pay for the pre- existing costing out of his own pocket. you cannot have it both ways. this offers us get opportunity for clarity on what the bill is actually about instead of being at the mercy of $200 million negative campaigns and misrepresentation. some would call the other things.

they put it out there to create extreme confusion. it is hard to talk about what the bill does. now we have a decision. they are talking about overturning it. we can say with clarity, this is what the bill does. this is what they want to take away from you. this is how they will increase your costs. we will let the public decide. thank you very much. thank you. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> the u.s. supreme court has

upheld all of president obama's health care law. we respect the court, but we respectfully disagree with the decision. just because that upheld the law as constitutional, it does not mean it is a good law. in fact, it is a terrible law. it fundamentally changes the relationship between the individual and the government. chief justice roberts acknowledged that. the court ruled that affordable health care act is a tax. it is the largest tax in american history. we also know that it has been estimated that 20 million americans will lose their employer insurance. it makes it harder for small businesses to hire. as a mom making health care

decisions, we have seen our premiums skyrocket on average $2,100 for families. for all of these reasons and more, the american people oppose this bill. the opposition has increased since the law was signed two years ago. that is why the republicans have pledged to americans to repeal this law. we are more determined than ever to repeal this law. the supreme court spoke today. but they will not have the final word. the american people will have a final word in november. >> i am from the hudson valley in new york. i am a physician. i have the privilege of caring for patients in the hudson valley for 16 years. i am here to represent patients and doctors across the country. my colleagues tell me that they are very concerned about their

ability to deliver the care that their patients deserves and have, rightly to expect under the terms of this law. i am worried about medicaid patients. this law, this 2010 law, takes half 1 trillion dollars out of medicare. this directly compromises their access to care. it is unacceptable. we are resolved to honor the goals of that law which are the right goals. we need to have good and affordable health insurance. it is the wrong law. we cannot afford to impose this bureaucracy on the american people. we can honor those goals in ways that make sense. we are here to put patients at the center of health care.

we're more determined than ever. we will succeed. >> hello. i am from north carolina. i represent the second district. is today i said a new chapter will be written off for health care as a result of the supreme court decision. it is not the chapter i was expecting, but it is one we will continue in the fight. i came to washington because of obamacare. as a nurse, and my husband as a doctor, we knew we had to buy health care. as a mother, i am concerned for our children. this decision keeps money out of health care, for medicare, for

our seniors. it also continues the independent payment advisory board which means 15 bureaucratic individuals will not be held accountable and make health care decisions for our seniors and citizens. the fight continues. the uncertainty remains. it is a vision that has kept me awake many times at night as a nurse. i am seeing myself holding the hand of a patient while the doctor comes into the room and says, their life-saving treatment will be denied because the independent advisory board deems it unnecessary. that remains in my mind. we are and will remain committed to this. we will repeal obamacare. this will continue to be our fight. then the chapter for reform, with the efficient and

responsible health care reform will be put into place. thank you. >> thank you. good afternoon. i am from new york's 25th district. i am a registered nurse. i have been in health care for most of my professional life. this is and has the personal and something i am passionate about. i have had my hospitals, my positions, senior citizens, come to me and saying that this law is bad. it will bankrupt us. it will affect the where we are able to provide health care for our patients. it may be constitutional, but it is not good policy. our primary goal is to enact

laws that are best for the american people. this law does not take any of the necessary steps to really reform the costs of health care. i have heard from the folks in my district all the time. i hear from hospitals that employers will put their employees into the exchange. there will lose their toys will help care. that is unacceptable. -- they will lose their choice in health care. that is unacceptable. today begins the fight. today begins another debate. today begins the debate about

how we will reform the healthcare in america. thank you. >> good afternoon. the president's health care law is hurting our economy. it is starting up health care costs. today's ruling underscores the urgency of repealing this harmful law and its entirety. what americans want is a common- sense, step-by-step approach that will protect americans. republican stand ready to work with a president will listen to the american people and not repeat the mistakes that gave our country this harmful law. health care card has become too expensive for too many people in our country. many are concerned about costs

of health insurance. the republican health care reforms will lower health care costs. women make about 80% of the health care decisions for their families in our country. republican health care reforms will make sure that families and make health care decisions and not washington. >> this afternoon. today's decision underscores the importance of this election. the people of america will have a choice to make in november. clearly it is a choice that will bear upon the direction of this country as far as their health care is concerned. the decision today really indicates we have entered an age in which the government in washington will be controlling health care unless something changes.

most americans, i believe, still like the health care that they have. the president has continued to say that his law will allow folks to keep the health care that they like. what we have seen is that is not the case. obamacare will preclude people from having the health care that they like. we have seen this law increase costs. we are committed to changing that. we are committed to making sure we can return to patient-based health care in this country. we want to keep costs low. we want to increase access. that is why when we return the week of july 9, i have scheduled a vote for total repeal of th obamacare repealed. that way, we can clear the way towards trying to again focus on accomplishing health care future that is focused and patient-centered care, and

better access. the decision raises the question, is the patient going to have the decisionmaking process or are you having a form of government run health care? it is a debate that will drive this house and the nation. the debate goes much deeper than just the ability for the access and the cost. at a time when america faces 40 months of unemployment above 8%, i am fearful. the discussions i have had with small-business owners, the decision today will determine decisions they make in jobs. the economy will not be turning around because this health care bill harms the economy.

their study showed there will take people off their current health care plans they have and raise the cost the debate has -- raise the cost. the debate has only begun. you see a group of individuals behind us, they will not be the only ones. across this nation it will be a healthy debate. when -- we look forward to working with those individuals and listening to the nation. health care that empowers the patient to make their own decision. >> today was not a good day for freedom. it was not a good day for struggling american families who wish to keep the health care they have. i respect the ruling of the supreme court and i respectfully and vehemently disagree with that. for those who have concluded it is constitutional, i remind them a constitutional law does not make for a wise law.

the $1 trillion deficit of the obama administration are clearly constitutional. they are not wise. the today will continue. this is hurting our economy and hurting jobs. every day here from some small- businessman who tells me they will never hire more than 50 people. they have spent three and a $50,000 in compliance costs and have laid off six workers. the lot -- this is a hundred dollars billion in taxes. premiums are up. the affordable care act is not -- has not proven so affordable. for struggling families. for taxpayers, much less a dwindling federal treasury. most importantly, americans want to be able to choose their own

doctor. they want quality health care. it want access to health care. they want portable health-care at a cost they can afford. the president's health care threaten that. the supreme court has heard today and where -- we respect it. it is the republican -- as the republican leader said, second week of july, the people's house will be heard from and the people from america will be heard from. >> this decision was a troubling decision. disagree with that decision. as chief justice roberts says, it is not the role of the courts to protect the people from their political decisions. the people chose in 2008 and we are living under the consequences of that choice. the doctors and patients are

troubled. this love -- law violates every single principle we hold dear as a nation in health care. whether it is accessibility or affordability, or high quality care, or choice for patients, this law violates the law and makes it more difficult. we will work together with their conference and the american people to make certain this law is repealed and we move forward in a logical, rational, delivered with patient centered health care. patients and families and doctors making decisions, not government. >> you would like to ask a question from all you have to do is raise your hand? anybody wants to yell, that will insure do not call on you. -- i do not calling you. >> can you explain how

[inaudible] sworn to uphold the constitution, you do not agree with the policy but is there not inconsistency there? you do not like the policy but you respect the decision of the court. >> the court makes a decision about whether this law is constitutional. it does not mean that the law is wise. it does not mean the law is good for the country. billick through the decision today and the chief justice and his -- in his opinion outlines the fact that the commerce clause is not constitutional. it is a tax that can proceed because of the congress has the ability to impose taxes. the government could decide that we're going to tax you if you do not eat broccoli on tuesday.

apparently, that is not constitutional but i do not think it is a wise law. all you have to do is raise your hand. >> the senate was unable to [inaudible] what make it necessary to go ahead again [inaudible] >> i think the real outcome of today's decision is to strengthen our resolve. to make sure that this law is in fact repealed. we will work every single day and the american people will have a chance to make their decision on election day. elections have consequences and the election as a consequence of

the most americans disagreeing. >> we surprised that chief justice roberts was the swing vote? >> i am blessed i am not a lawyer. it is not for me to decide. i am disappointed in their decision, they came to a decision to my respected. >> a democrat say the fact that you're holding another vote to repeal is a sign that republicans are sore losers and there are laws that republicans have passed that they're not holding votes constantly to repeal. >> resolve. there is a lot of resolve amongst our colleagues and the american people to stop a law that is hurting our economy, driving up the cost of health care, and making it more difficult for employers to hire new workers. the american people want this

bill repealed. they want common sense steps imploring themt to choose their doctor. >> [inaudible] >> we will -- the american people will make that seven and on election day. >> do you think it will help motivate [inaudible] >> what i am concerned about is a law that is driving up the cost of health care and making and hire for -- harder for employers to hire people. >> this ruling that the pen alty is having taxing power, [inaudible] would future republican powerhouses put in a penalty for failing? >> repealing this entire law is the right thing to do. it will help our economy and

bring down health-care costs. it will save medicare from being cut by $500 billion and we can put in place common-sense steps that will help the american people have better access to the quality care they want. thanks, everybody. >> chuck schumer said chief justice john roberts's opinion upholding the health care law is a welcome display of judicial independence. senator schumer and other leaders spoke with reporters in the capital for 15 minutes. after this to hear from senate minority leader mitch mcconnell. >> this lot has changed the lives of millions of americans in so many different ways for the better. and soon virtually every man, woman, and child in america will access -- have access it can

afford and the care they need. the supreme court has spoken. the matter is settled. with millions of americans still struggling in this tough economy, we cannot look back. we need to look forward. we should not waste time we fighting old battles. we should focus on creating jobs. improving the economy. republicans have made it clear that instead of focusing on jobs, they want to keep having this old political fight. republicans have announced one day next month there will have a vote on what, repealing as they say obamacare. it is a show vote. a show vote on votes and votes they have had so many different times to repeal the law.

this is what my friend and republican leader said. "this does not mark the end of the debate. it makes -- marks a fresh start on the road to repeal." that is what -- not what middle- class oamericans want to hear. we should be improving the economy, not wasting time on political issues. we will take up legislation to cut taxes for employees, employers, and these we want to make sure that these employers who decide to buy a new piece of equipment will be able to appreciate it this year. we want to make sure that when they hire new people there will be able to get a 10% tax credit for them. we will consider a bill to give incentives for corporations that started facilities at home and

we will do everything we can to stop corporations from shipping jobs overseas. my republican colleagues should think hard about whether they want to continue living the tea party debate their agenda. one of the tea party's folks who is a member of the u.s. senate said just because a small number of people said that is constitutional does not mean it is. can you believe that? that is what he said. it is time to start listening to the middle class. the middle class who so badly needs our help and republicans should stop fighting yesterday's battles and start working with -- americansrica's back to work. >> republicans said the four will care act was unconstitutional and unnecessary. today in this opinion, the

supreme court made it clear that the affordable care act, signed by president obama, passed by congress, is constitutional. the highest court in the land has spoken and they have told us what we did fits within our constitutional authority. is it necessary? i would take that issue on in my state of illinois with republicans to argue we should not do anything, explain that to the families come out the 102,025-year-old to now have health insurance through their families. explain that to the millions of uninsured people in illinois who do not have to worry about pre- existing conditions, denying coverage to a child or lifetime limits, cutting off chemotherapy mid-course. explain that to the thousands and thousands of senior citizens across america who are getting a helping hand paying for their prescription drugs. we also know that expanding medicaid offering the expansion of medicaid means people will

be paying patients going into hospitals. today, the estimate only 1% of america will end up in the category of those who decide they do not want hilton -- health insurance at all. those people are shirking their -- personal responsibility. when they're brought into health care coverage, it is fair for every family, every business, everybody in america. it is time for us to put some of these political battles behind us and join together on a bipartisan basis to not only tackle this problem, to make health care more affordable and more reasonable, to tackle the larger, more challenging problem of creating more good paying jobs in america. we'll come back after the fourth of july recess with a proposal to help small businesses hire more people. it would be a breath of fresh air if the bipartisanship that we've seen for the past several weeks in the senate will

continue when it comes to the small business jobs bill. we should work together. democrats and republicans for affordable healthcare and morbid paint jobs in america. >> thank you. this is not the first time -- this is not the time for the supporters of health care to gloat, nor is the time for sour grapes. justice -- republicans should not carry on out of pique. democrats remain willing to cooperate on potential -- on improvements but now that all three branches of government have ratified the law, the time for quarreling is over. the time for disputing its validity is over. congress should not return to its full-time focus.

the issue of jobs and the economy in america. you ask people what they want us to focus on, they're not rehashing health care. there may be -- the american people want us to focus on jobs, the economy, health, and the middle class and that is what we will be doing the rest of the session even if our colleagues want to look backward. it is unfortunate speaker john boehner and house republicans are plowing ahead with the repeal vote after the fourth of july recess. the republicans are trapped in a sense between their tea party base that wants to repeal this law at all costs and the rest of the country which wants them to move on. so far to republicans seem to be casting their lot with the tea party and this is a mistake. the public is fatigue with all these parties in fights. they want to keep reelecting

them. republicans should not be so quick to dismiss another potential effect of this decision. the health care law could will receive a second airing with the public because of this decision, the courts delegation of the law may cause americans to reconsider their opinion of it as well. there is a precedent for this. when social security was passed. it was decried as socialism. health care withstood a constitutional challenge and social security went on to endure as a cherished program in the country. the health care law is getting more popular with time as well as -- as more and more of it goes into effect. lastly, this decision preserves not only the health care law but the supreme court's position, an institution above politics.

i and others have criticized the conservative bloc for its heavy- handed activists and -- activism. the chief justice in this case acted as the empire that he promised to be -- umpire he promised to be. some have expressed surprise. he is the most powerful conservative in washington who does not have to worry about the next election. unlike the gop pose the elected leaders, robert can afford to follow lot rather than fret about his standing with the tea party. his was a welcome display of judicial independence. the supreme court should use more than one swing vote every now and again. >> today's victory was for the american people and now it is time for us to move on.

i have heard from so many people in my home state of washington about the security that they have been waiting for when it comes to their health care. a woman came up to me on the street and said she had been diagnosed with cancer, was about to go into extensive chemotherapy, and was so worried that a decision to undo the health care law would mean that she would lose your coverage. a business owner told me that because she was now getting tax credits for the first time because of the health care law did not have to lay off to employees this year. and to keep her business going. this is the people that they can -- the law can make a difference for. they want us to do the right thing and move to get the economy back on its feet and create jobs and getting this

country strong again. this is what we as senate democrats intend to do. >> ok. >> [inaudible] >> every governor will sit and statehitheir state a better and those governors who are saying some things, if they continue, there will wish they have not. there will not have the ability to help their constituents like those states who have it. >> the individual mandate is not a tax. do you think it is a tax? >> i am not here to give everyone my limited knowledge of constitutional law. i am here to say that the law

has been upheld. it is good for the country. it is good for my people in nevada. it is something that we can look at, i do not have to worry about a child that is born with a cleft palate. i do not have to worry about a child who shortly after birth develops diabetes. or as the kids who came to see me today, have cystic fibrosis that develops. i do not have to worry about them. all of them, will be entitled to an insurance even though they have a pre-existing disability. the people who stay on their parents' insurance policy, they're benefiting from the slot. millions of senior citizens who have not had a donut hole filled, they can get wellness checks. i am not going to give you a

dissertation on constitutional law. the law has been upheld and i am happy it has been. >> if the house takes a vote --[inaudible] given the sixty vote requirements and the president's signature, is it a waste of time for the house of representatives? >> they should be focusing on jobs. we have millions of people who are underemployed or unemployed. that is what -- we're here today. telling each of you we're focusing continually on job creation and we need the republicans to join with us. america needs economic help and just like our small -- we will vote the way to get back. employers want that to happen.

they can write off brand new equipment. the question is are they wasting their time? the should be spending it on jobs. >> [inaudible] >> at one time in my life i was really good with a yo-yo. governor romney migust be really good with a yo-yo. at one time he is up and another time he is down. the only thing consistent about him is ainconsistency.

>> [inaudible] >> we passed a law. you cannot repeal it about -- by executive order. we're here to talk about jobs. >> [inaudible] in november, they could seek to repeal as much of the law as possible. [inaudible] >> all the more reason the american people should understand we want to focus on jobs, not taking away benefits that millions of americans have today for sure. there is no more uncertainty. we're focusing on jobs. let them vote is on taking these things away from the american people, including the repeal this, it is a loss of $400,000 -- 400,000 jobs. we are here to focus on saving those jobs and creating more jobs. >> [inaudible]

>> two and a half years ago, there was a piece of legislation forced on the american people than ever asked for and has been turned out to be just as disastrous as many of us predicted. federal debt and accelerated increases in government health spending, they proposed a bill that made all of those problems worse. americans were promised lower health care costs. they're going up. americans were promised lower premiums. they're going up. most americans were promised their taxes wouldn't change, and they're going up. seniors were promised medicare would be protected. it was raided to pay for a new entitlement instead.

americans were promised it would create jobs. the c.b.o. predicts it will lead to nearly a million fewer jobs. americans were promised they could keep their health plans if they liked it, yet millions have learned they can't. and the president of the united states himself promised up and down that this bill was not a tax. this was one of the democrats' top selling points because they knew it would never have passed if they said it was a tax. well, the supreme court has spoken. this law is a tax. the bill was sold to the american people on a deception. but it's not just that the promises about this law weren't kept.

it's that it made the problems it was meant to solve even worse. the supposed cure has proven to be worse than the disease. so the pundits will talk a lot today about what they think today's ruling means and what it doesn't mean, but i can assure you of this: republicans won't let up whatsoever in our determination to repeal this terrible law and replace it with the kind of reforms that will truly address the problems it was meant to solve. now, look, we've passed plenty of terrible laws around here that the court finds constitutional. constitutionality was never an argument to keep this law in place and it's certainly not one you'll hear from republicans in congress. there's only one way to truly fix obama-care, only one way,

and that's a full repeal. a full repeal that clears the way for commonsense, step-by-step reforms that protect americans' access to the care they need, from the doctor they choose, at a lower cost. and that's precisely what republicans are committed to doing. the american people weren't waiting on the supreme court to tell them whether they supported this law. that question was settled 2 1/2 years ago. the more the american people have learned about this law, the less they have liked it. so now the court has ruled. it's time to move beyond the constitutional debate and focus on the primary reason this law should be fully repealed and replaced -- because of the colossal damage it has already

done to our health care system, to the economy, and to the job market. the democrat health care law has made things worse. americans want it repealed and that's precisely what we intend to do. americans want us to start over, and today's decision does nothing to change that. the court's ruling doesn't mark the end of the debate. it marks a fresh start on the road to repeal. that's been our goal from the start. that's our goal now, and we plan to achieve it. the president has done nothing to address the problems of cost, care, and access. we will

>> congressional democrats praised the 5-4 ruling upholding most of president obama's health care law. members of the house and senate were joined on the steps of the supreme court by health care activist ron pollack. >> only those between 15 and 40 where were they. worthy.

>> i am senator harkin. the committee that was in charge of passing the affordable care act to committee and the senate. today's decision by the supreme court is a rigorous, resounding confirmation of the constitutionality of the affordable care act. this great news for america's families, businesses, and our economy. the affordable correct moves us forward for every person. even though the law will not be fully implemented for several more years, it has made a big difference in the lives of many americans. 100 million americans have

received further preventative care great 105 million americans no longer face lifetime caps on benefits. . nearly 17 million children can no longer be denied coverage because of pre-existing health conditions. today's decision keeps consumers rather than insurance companies in the driver's seat. today's decision projects more than $1 trillion in deficit reduction. today's decision allows us to continue our work replacing the current sick care system with a true health care system. one focus on wellness and prevention and public health and keeping people out of the hospital in the first place. the supreme court has made it clear what we have known all along. those trying to block healthcare reform by standing on the right -- wrong side of history.

for those of us who believe quality health care is a right and not a privilege, this is a great day. it is time, time for speaker put politicsner to behind us and no person is denied coverage due to pre- existing condition. no one has their coverage canceled when the get sick and to make sure that women are no longer brazenly discriminated against by insurance companies. i have often said that the affordable health care act is like a starter home, suitable for improvement. i joined -- call on republicans to join us in making sensible refinements. in by republicans to bring their tool kits, not their sledgehammers. let's make the affordable healthcare act work for every

puerto rican. the choice is to go forward or be dragged backwards. the majority of americans and now the supreme court has said we want to go forward. the justices have spoken. let's get back to work, building a reformed health-care system that works not just for the wealthy or the healthy but works for every american. with that i want to introduce a great partner who was been in has far -- fight, who written part of this, from maryland, senator barbara mikulski. [applause] >> the morning, america. good morning, the world. do you want to know what democracy looks like? come to constitution avenue. this is what democracy looks like. the congress voted for health care. the supreme court has ruled on

health care. healthcare is legal. constitutional, undeniable and irreversible. let's hear it for democracy. we can go forward with making sure that 32 million people have universal access. we have broken the stranglehold of insurance companies wear pin- striped guys sitting in their board rooms decided who got health care. we know the people will get the health care they need that their doctor says they need, and there will be able to afford it and be able to get it. the crowds are cheering. and for women, it is an enormous victory. today we have been able to

affirm that insurance companies will no longer be able to discriminate on the basis of gender. where women pay 30% more for their health care as men with the same health care status. simply being a woman will not be a pre-existing condition. we cannot be denied health care because we're pregnant. because we have had a c section. or because we have had domestic violence. we affirm our brand of health care, we will be able to get preventive mammograms and get to care. we have fought for the men. it is very noisy here, it is very noisy -- very exciting year. this is the voice of democracy. douglas america. thank god the supreme court --

[inaudible] >> ben cardin, senator from maryland. i have had the honor of serving with senator barbara mikulski. i want to thank my colleagues that are here from the house of representatives for they're incredible work on behalf of the american people. this is a good day for the american people. the one -- they won today. the decision affirms the proper role for the congress of the united states. it allows us to move forward with quality, affordable health care for all americans. healthcare is a right, not a privilege. you're able to continue to move forward. it allows us to move forward with the reforms to protect consumers against the practices of insurance companies that would deny them coverage, pre- existing conditions that allow families to keep their children

on their insurance policies until age 26 and allows us to continue to expand medicare coverage, the coverage gap for prescription drugs and wellness exams for our seniors. let's move forward with quality health care for all americans and do it in a more affordable, cost-effective way. this is good for the taxpayers of our country. the important message from the supreme court is that it is time for democrats and republicans to move forward with health care. let's not read-litigate what has been done. let us continue to make progress so that all americans get -- candidate have health care in america. this is the message from the supreme court and this is what we continue to do. thank you. >> thank you. is an historic decision and

an important moment for our country. the people of delaware, my constituents, my neighbors, friends kathrin and malini have had their lives changed for the better by the affordable care act. for me has always been about the people whose lives are changed for the better credit than the politics being shouted by the opponents of this important bill. i am pleased that the supreme court today affirmed its role in our constitutional order by deciding on narrow and appropriate grounds to uphold the four elements of the affordable healthcare act. let me tell you what this matters to be people in my state. melanie met my wife at a breast cancer walk. like her mother and sister before, she was diagnosed with near-filled breast cancer. her husband left her when he heard this news and she lost her

health care, provided through her husband's employer. having lost health care, she could not get health care through a new employer. she lost not only her opportunity and getting life- saving treatment, but her home. facing bankruptcy, facing death, it was through the affordable healthcare act that she was able to get health insurance despite her pre-existing condition that made possible critical care in delaware's hospitals. another woman, katherine. when her husband passed away, her daughter lost health care because she could no longer afford corporate. it was through the affordable healthcare act that health care was reinstated for doctor. dozens of others who fought so hard to pass this landmark bill can tell you dozens of similar stories from their states. it is time for us to work together.

republican and democrat, senate and house, to focus on the issues that matter to the people of america. providing affordable, high- quality health care, insisting on progress on moving forward rather than on those who would fight to take america backwards. i am grateful for the slimmer decision by the supreme court today, of holding the constitutionality of the corporate session -- the conditions of the affordable healthcare act. >> i am turning it over to rep keith ellison who will introduce the house members who are here and also family, usa. >> let's hear it for our senators, everybody. pollack.ned by dr. back in the day, roosevelt went

to see health care for all americans. truman wanted to see it. kennedy wanted to see it. we remember how president kennedy fought for it. but today, health care for all americans has been found to be constitutional. we are out here today marking this victory, clear that this was the right thing to do and clear that we are going ahead full and continued to make health care truly something that all americans can have and enjoy. i'm so proud to be here with members of the progressive caucus and the progressive community who fought for health care, who will continue to fight for health care. [inaudible] who fought so hard and we have more moriles to go.

let's take a moment to celebrate. let me say, come on up to my co- chair, mr. grijalva of arizona. >> thank you very much and despite the shrillness next door. today is a significant day for the american people. a huge step by the supreme court by rolling the core of the affordable healthcare act has provided steps for the fundamental right that everybody in this country should have health care. today, it is a firm that a minimum level of coverage for every american is constitutional and right. we should celebrate that. more to do, yes. we have broken the ice on a decade-old inability to do health care and discussion.

the people next door should be happy. today the supreme court affirmed that romneycare is constitutional and they should be happy about that and celebrate it with us. today is a victory not just for president obama, not for those of us who supported this, but a victory for the american people on this long, tough road to get us through to this point to create a climate in this country where health care is a fundamental right, available and affordable for every american. thank you very much. [applause] >> i am congresswomen carolyn maloney. god bless america act, god bless the constitution, and god bless those on both sides of the aisle who have made health care their top priority. thank you, president obama. it is a great day for americans,

not for one party or another or for an ideology but for the 34 million americans who will have access to affordable, available health care. it is a great win for the seniors who will no longer fall through the doughnut hole and four women who will not be discriminated against by insurance policies that historically charged them more for their premiums than their male colleagues. and women will no longer be treated as a pre-existing condition. thereby denying coverage for our pregnancies, sections, and the very important preventive measures in the bill that will help prevent cancer and diseases. it is a great victory for our country which is joining that economically advantaged countries that are providing health care to their people, all their people. and time to go back to work, creating jobs for healthy

americans. >> i have a lot of congress members waiting. >> today, the supreme court did not disgrace itself. in upholding the affordable care act, the supreme court has shown that even in a time when washington often seems to have reached a new level of dysfunction, there remains a respect for the roll block a respect for -- rule of law, respect for congress, and -- [cheering]

there remains a respect for the ability of congress to legislate on matters that affect the welfare of the american people. that is what was at stake today. by not caving in to the most craven political calls, the supreme court has stood by 70 years of legal precedent to insure that 32 million brookins will now have access to health insurance to insure that 42,000 americans will no longer die every year for lack of health insurance, to ensure that many of the benefits of the affordable health care act to ensure that people can no longer be denied insurance, health insurance, because of pre- existing conditions. this is a good bill, it is a good start. we have more to do. the supreme court said today that despite the reactionary nature of the courts, the

affordable care act is so clearly constitutional that it upheld it. the supreme court did not disgrace itself today and we can go on from here to legislate for the better welfare of the american people. rightre going to have now, dr. pollack. thank you. >> good morning. i'm the executive director of families, u.s.a., the national organization for health care consumers. today is a holiday, and for america's families. hello lee a a hallu moment. tens of millions of people are going to get help so that insurance is affordable. it means insurance companies can no longer deny coverage to

people with pre-existing conditions, like children with asthma and diabetes. it means insurance companies can no longer set an artificial cap i and what they're willing to pay out when somebody has a catastrophic illness or an accident. it means that women will no longer be discriminated against and have to pay higher premiums. it means that small businesses will get tax credits so they can afford to provide health coverage for their workers. and bottom line, tens of millions of people will get health coverage for the first time. this is an extraordinary moment and the effort to defeat the affordable care act has been stopped in its tracks. now we get on with the task of implementing health reform in every state all across the country. this is truly a moment for

america's families. health reform is moving forward. >> i am from the ninth congressional district. imagine today, the burden of worrying that is now lifted from the shoulders of millions and millions of americans. well lager under -- no longer will families have to worry that someone will have a catastrophic illness and not only will they have to do with the illness but the whole family may go bankrupt because of it. that will not happen because of obamacare. no longer with -- will a woman with breast cancer or men with prostate cancer worry that she will not have access or he will not have access to the health care they need. there will have access to health care. this is such a great decision. we congratulate chief justice

roberts and the majority of the court for deciding that the law of the land is that health care, finally, in the united states of america, is a right and not just a privilege for those who can afford it. thank you. >> and now, we have the chair of the women's caucus. >> brothers and sisters, ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls. today is a day we have been waiting on for over a century in this country. the supreme court's decision to uphold obamacare, and i said very broadly today, is especially important for women and children, the most vulnerable among americans. women are twice as likely as a man to be dependent upon their

spouses for health care insurance. children who are covered until they're 26 are dependent upon their parents for health care. as the co-chair of the women's caucus, i am especially in celebrating this decision today. for women and children in the united states. i hope that in november, when will appreciate -- women will appreciate the work and the sacrifice that democrats have made to bring this bill forward to the supreme court. thank you. >> flore richardson of california. >> i would like to focus on two points. in 1968, at six years old, laura richardson from california, i wanted to become a member of

congress. i thought there were laws that were not fair. i want to say to chief justice roberts for showing for the first time in a long time that government can work if we focus on the fact that we do what is right. in my district, we have people who cannot afford to have health care. we have young people who, due to no fault of their own, can i get a job and therefore do not have coverage. today, chief justice roberts and the other rubber -- members of this court said we are going to get back to doing things right. my second point for president obama. i remember many of my colleagues here just over a year ago, we walked across the street, we were spat on, we were carlstadt for setting up for people. and today, now, we're able to say that the right thing was done, let's get about doing more work and stop the politics and

help the american people. thank you. >> and former chair of the progressive caucus. >> thank you. today, the supreme court affirmed the will of the american people. but you know, the struggle is not over. you can hear that the republicans are going to try to dismantle step-by-step by step everything that is in this legislation, and everything that the american people stand for. but instead, we now can strengthen this act. we can at healthcare for all -- add health care for opri we can make sure there is competition to make sure that we have medicare for everybody. and when we do that, nobody will worry ever again about whether

they have health care in the united states of america. thank you, supreme court. thank you, progressive caucus, thank we all made this happen. thank you very much. [cheers and applause] >> thank you for coming out. i represent the people of new jersey. would have extended human rights to every person. to provide access to excellent health care for every woman, a child, every man, is part of the progress. today the supreme court has allowed the progress to continue. we have work to do. we should not be continuing this

circus that we see around this. we should be getting to the work to make sure we extend affordable, excellent health care to every person in america. the supreme court's decision makes that possible. >> thank you. >> today the supreme court has upheld the affordable health care act. we took a lot of hits on behalf of the american people. we have had a lot of noise from the right. but it is the law of the land. the people have one. -- have won. will be a stronger and more competitive country. i want to say that i am proud of the work he has done to expand

access and taking our nation closer. i want to thank our partners who have made this day possible. i applaud the administration and secretary sibelius' for their commitment to implementing the law. a look forward to working with them to make sure that the provisions remain and are fully implemented. we will work with the same partners to make sure that no state denies any of their citizens the right to medicate the we provide in this bill. it is time to do the work of the people. we did pass our bills. we need to take care of the people we were elected to serve. [applause] >> is peter walsh still here?

ok. >> thank you very much. i represent the first congressional district of maine. i am proud to stand up here with my colleagues celebrating this great victory. cannottreme right-winge draw up the supreme court. the supreme court decided to go with the american people and against the insurance companies. this decision means that for all of those people who have been having sleepless nights and wondering if their children up to 26 can stay on their insurance coverage, or if there pre-existing conditions will be covered. they do not have to worry any more. thanks to the leadership of our president, nancy pelosi,

democrats across the country, this law is standing. we will continue to fight for its improvement. i am proud to stand with my colleagues today. for once, i am proud of the u.s. supreme court. [cheers and applause] >> progressive leader. [applause] >> oh, my god. i am brought to tears today. i want to thank everyone who is standing here. many of us come from the poorest districts in the land. i come from one of the poorest districts in america. i stand here today in the name of the sick laying in the hospital beds, young women to try to get young children immunized, seniors -- as tender

gratified for all of those hours and town hall meetings. as saying that there was no care or humanitarianism in this country. this it need to be taken care of. i stand in a place where i could not be on the day of the emancipation proclamation when slaves were freed. i could not be there, but my ancestors could tell me what it meant to be free. today i stand on the steps of the supreme court, feeling free them for those who lay sick in their beds. god is present for us. i am grateful for the supreme court who recognized above- to uphold theting

constitution that allowed to tax even the poorest, and if we had undermined the constitutional structure, the government would not exist. i come we stand your today feeling a sense that my pain has been overcome. my mother who died as a vocational nurse, she lived with a sick is that was chronic, if we did not have universal medicare for those over the age of 65, they would lay dead in their graves even before they could see their grandchildren. i stand your today by saying, america is a great country. -- i stand here today by saying, america is a great country. we believe in the humanity of all. thank you got. thank you america. i thank the constitution.

thank you to the supreme court. i walk away in dignity. oh, yes! [cheers and applause] >> our last speaker will be clark from michigan. >> everyone, i represent the city of detroit. this ruling is simple. healthcare is a right for all americans. when more people have health insurance, health insurance is affordable for everyone. it makes financial sense. we needed this mandate to make insurance affordable for even the sickest americans. healthy americans could buy health insurance. more of us have health insurance. thank you. >> thank you, everyone.

this has been a progressive caucus. will keep fighting and moving. take good care. >> four more years. >> everyone, let's thank our leader. [cheers and applause] >> members of the house to party caucus were also in front of the supreme court on thursday. it was led by the former gop candidate. this is 10 minutes. >> thank you all for coming. my name is michele bachmann. i am a member of contests. i represent minnesota. i heard the decision come down. -- i am a member of congress. others are making their way over

from the capital. we will begin this morning with the brief reaction. sandy, it is yourself and your district. >> hello. i am from florida 24th district. i am disappointed, but i resolve to repeal this legislation. this has done nothing more than raise your health care costs. it puts government between you and your doctors. it is impeding our businesses from hiring more people. this legislation must be repealed. i am committed to that. >> good morning. i am proud to be here with michele bachmann and sandy. i will tell you, at the end of the day, our minds are on

solving our problems. it was weak, the people -- it was we, the people. we need to demand that the government repeals this law. my commitment to you and to the people is that i will continue to fight and insurer that we will appeal this damaging legislation that knows no limit to the federal government cost power. thank you. [cheers and applause] >> thank you very much. i am from texas. i think just had it exactly right. the final check of the power of the government is the people. if you object to this law, of it isntinuing overagreach,

up to you to elect the people to put a stop to it. people let their representatives you have to hear. people throughout this country are committed to less taxes and more freedom. it is up to each and every one of you in november to go out and exercise your right to vote. say no to laws like this. it is an invasion of the doctor- patient relationship. there is a new tax that was this year's created by the supreme court. thank you. >> a congressman. >> i am disappointed by the supreme court today. they said the end of the demand was not unconstitutional -- they said the individual mandate was

not unconstitutional according to the clause. president obama broke his word to the american people. he has said that this was not pay tax. the supreme court confirmed that this is a tax, and massive increase tax on american families. it is a very people he said he would not tax. it confirms that. i am more resolve to go back to work to repeal this entire law. we will have hearings starting next week to repeal this law. we need to fix the things that are broken. obamacare promise to lower health care costs. it has been making problems worse. we need to fix the problems in health care. we need to lower costs. obamacare made the worst. the u.s. supreme court had their say. the american people will have their say on the first tuesday

in november. [cheers and applause] >> support sunglasses for dogs. >> thank you. i am from florida. it has been said that the power to tax as a power to destroy. a lot of destruction was done by this decision. i am concerned about two things. first, the impact on our senior citizens. this is a devastating blow to american seniors. it will have have 1 trillion dollars cut from medicaid. -- medicare. they will also limit the choices of our seniors. vote for care.

the second thing, as a business person, this is a death knell for businesses in this country. small businesses have been reeling from the thought of is going into a effect. more todecision will do hurt our economy than anything we can do in washington. this is a bad day for businesses. it is a bad day for senior citizens. it is a bad day for america. congress needs to appeal this now. [cheers and applause] >> i want to thank the members who are only a small sample of the tea party in the congress. we have a large contingent. they are all engaged in many things. there are out reacting to this unprecedent decision. there are two things we want to

say. as a result of the president postilion dollars stimulus program and of obamacare, all across the u.s., you saw americans attending town hall meetings other members of congress. that was august and may 2009. they stood up. they held their members of congress and senators accountable for what happened with obamacare. people were not happy. we saw in 2010 people came to the ballot box. we saw nancy pelosi lose as a direct result. [cheers and applause] and because of that, we saw a new majority in the contest that did pass a repeal of obamacare. members of the tea party , as did vote to repeal

obamacare. -- tea party caucus did vote to repeal obamacare. we need to complete the job in the senate and in the white house. we do not have a choice. our legal remedy has now concluded in the supreme court. it is inexplicable, this decision. there is no foundation for upholding the individual mandate. this court has ruled today. this has met a turning point in american history. it is the expansion of government power over our liberties and even our very lives. for the first time in the history of the country, we need everyone of you -- and they will force every one of tyou to

purchase products just because you breathe. next, dr. dawn plumjohn flemmin. [applause] >> it is hard to follow michele bachmann. she is doing a wonderful job for us. she is a strong conservative. my name is john fleming. 4th district in the louisiana. i have provided health care

benefits. i have an understanding of this. wayne obamacare -- we know obamacare has taken away consumer choices. it is intriguing in the relationship between you and your doctor. in thes intriguuding relationship between you and your doctor. it said it is not the supreme court's job to fix the mistakes made by congress. it is up to the people who elect the members of congress and the president to decide what kind of policy you want in this nation. and such, it is our responsibility as members of congress to repeal obamacare.

we will pull it out by its roots. we intend to do that. do we have support for that? anyone in for that? [cheers and applause] remember, if you are going to get more people covered under health care, you need to make it affordable and attractive. you cannot force it through the law. we want more consumer choices and not more government mandates to micromanage every day of your lives. there is a difference between health care coverage and access to health care. there are countries around the world that have been hard to% health care coverage. -- that have 100% health care coverage even our neighbor to the north, canada, and even

great britain, to have 100% coverage, but i have to wait in line. that is not a value that we won in america. we thank you everyone for coming out. the house of representatives will be voting once again to repeal obamacare. if that does not happen, then you know what to do on november 6. >> on "washington journal," we will focus on the supreme court's decision to hold virtually all of the health care law. then from 8:00 tonight o'clock eastern we will speak with former members of the house including the republican conference vice-chairman represented cathy mcmorris rodgers of washington, illinois represented at janikowski

project jan schakowsky. "washington journal," live every day at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c- span. >> the heritage foundation will host a forum tomorrow morning on the supreme court's decision to uphold the constitutionality of the health-care law. that will be live on c-span3 at 10:00 a.m. eastern. because attorney general eric holder is declining to turn over certain documents related to the gun trafficking investigation operation fast and furious, the house today voted to hold the attorney general in contempt of congress. that debate is coming up in a few moments. in little less than an hour and half, the attorney general's response to the house vote. after that, we will repair our coverage of the supreme court's decision today of holding virtually all of the president's health-care plan, including the individual mandate requiring americans to buy insurance.

the u.s. house of representatives has held attorney general eric holder in contempt of congress. more than 100 democrats left the house chamber and did not vote. debate was nearly an hour and a half. >> i never thought we'd be here today. i never thought this point would come. throughout 18 months of investigation, for countless areas of negotiations in order to get the minimum material necessary to find out the facts behind fast and furious and that murder of border patrol agent ryan terry. reach an accommodation sufficient to get the information needed for the american people while at the same time preserving the ongoing criminal investigation. i'm proud to say that our committee has maintained the

ability for the justice department to continue their ongoing prosecutions, neither the majority nor minority has allowed any material to become public that could compromise that. however, the facts remain fast and furious, the department of justice permitted sale of more than 2,000 weapons that fell into the hands of the mexican drug cartels was both reckless and inexcusable, and it clearly was known by people both career professionals and political appointees from the lowliest member on the ground in phoenix to high ranking officials in the department of justice. but that's not what we are here for today. today we are here on a very narrow contempt, one that the speaker of the house in his wisdom and assistance has helped us to fashion. let it be clear we still have unanswered questions on a myriad of areas related to operation fast and furious, but

today we are only here to determine over the 10 months from the time in which the american people and the congress of the united states was lied to, given false -- literally the reverse statement that no guns were allowed to walk. during that 10 months before the justice department finally owned up and recognized that they had to come clean, that in fact fast and furious was all about gunwalking. the department of justice maintained a series of documents, many of these documents are believed to be communications between and with the very individuals at the heart of the decision to go forward with fast and furious. therefore we have focused our limited contempt on those documents. if our committee is able to receive the documents in totality that show who brought about the dishonest at the same time to congress and who covered it up for 10 months, we believe that will allow us to backtrack to the individuals

who ultimately believed in fast and furious, facilitated fast and furious, and ultimately may be responsible for brian terry's death. i yield myself an additional 15 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. issa: i won't read everything that's in my opening statement. i will read just one more thing. these words were said on the house floor in 2008. when speaker pelosi supported contempt. she said, congress has a responsibility of oversight of the executive branch. i know that members on both sides of the aisle take the responsibility very seriously. oversight is an institutional obligation to ensure against abuse of power, subpoena authority is a vital tool of that oversight. speaker pelosi, 2008. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from maryland. mr. cummings: thank you very much, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore:

gentleman from maryland is recognized for as much time as he may consume. mr. cummings: today, mr. speaker, is a historic day in many ways. on the one hand in a landmark decision by chief justice john roberts, the supreme court upheld the health care bill ensuring that millions of american families will finally have access to effective and affordable health care. on the other hand, the republican leaders of the house are about to plunge into the history books as some of the most extreme and partisan ever. rather than working together in a bipartisan way to create jobs and help our nation's economic recovery, they are rushing to the floor under emergency procedures with a contempt resolution that is riddledle with errors and motivated by partisan politics. when i first heard about the allegations of gunwalking at a.t.f., i was outraged. i fully supported our committee's goals of finding out how it started, how it was

used, and how it may have contributed to the death of border patrol agent brian terry. i made a personal commitment which i will keep to the terry family to conduct a responsible and thorough inquiry. but today's contempt vote is a culmination of one of the most highly politicized and reckless congressional investigations in decades. after receiving thousands of pages of documents from the justice department, conducting two dozen transcribed interviews, and hearing testimony from the attorney general nine times, here are the facts. first, the committee has obtained no evidence that the attorney general authorized, condoned, or knew about gunwalking. chairman issa admitted this just yesterday before the rules committee. we have seen no evidence that the attorney general lied to congress or engaged in a cover-up. we have seen no evidence that the white house had anything to

do with the gunwalking operations. chairman issa admitted this on "fox news sunday" this past weekend. democratic -- democrats wanted a real investigation. chairman issa refused 10 different requests to hold a hearing where the director of a.t.f., the agency that ran these misguided operations. let me say that again. during this entire investigation no member of the house has been able to pose a single question to the head of a.t.f. at a public hearing. how could you have a credible investigation of gunwalking at a.t.f. and never hold a single hearing with the leadership of the agency in charge? the answer is, you can't. based on the documents we know -- we now know, the gunwalking in fact started in 2006. yesterday chairman issa said this about the misguided operations during the bush administration and i quote,

they were allle failures, end of quote. the committee has obtained documentary evidence that former attorney general mccasey was personally briefed on these botched interdiction efforts during his tenure and that he was told they would be expanded. chairman issa refused to call mr. mccasey for a hearing or even for a private meeting. during our committee's year and a half investigation, the chairman refused every single democratic request for witness. instead of taking any of these reasonable steps as part of a credible and evenhanded investigation to determine the facts, house republican leaders rushed this resolution to the floor only one week after it was voted out of committee. in contrast, during the last congress, house leaders continued to negotiate for six months to try to avoid contempt in the united states attorney's

investigation. mr. speaker, some of my colleagues on the other side seem almost giddy about today's vote. after turning this investigation into an election year witch-hunt, they somehow convinced the speaker to take it to the floor. and they are finally about to get the prize they have been seeking for more than a year, holding the attorney general of the united states of america in contempt. they may view today's vote as a success, but in reality it is a sad failure, a failure of our leadership, a failure of our constitutional obligations, and a failure of our responsibilities to the american people. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland reserves. the gentleman from virginia. -- california. million issa: the gentleman from -- i'll leave his statement where it lay. i now yield three minutes to the gentleman from

pennsylvania, the distinguished congressman meehan, a former u.s. attorney in that district. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized for three minutes. mr. meehan: thank you, mr. chairman. mr. chairman, this is not about politics. though there are some if they want to suggest that it is because of you yell at it long enough it will deflect the truth of the matter. it's not about gotcha. as a former prosecutor myself. the attorney general personifies the pursuit of justice and i want to see him do well, but it is about accountability. agent brian terry is dead, protecting our border, and 5 3 days later the -- 563 days later the terry family still does not know why it occurred. what they do know is that the very agency that initiated fast and furious, the department of justice, under attorney general eric holder, called the

operation fatally flawed and then the wagons got circled. it's about the separation of powers. as uncomfortable as it may be at times, it's a fundamental tenet and strength of our democracy that congress is given not just the power but the responsibility to exercise its duty -- oversight over the executive, especially when by their own admission things have gone glaringly wrong. because the justice department has stubbornly resisted the tempt inquiries of congress, over operation fast and furious, there's so much we do not know. but because whistle blowers within the department of justice were outraged mischaracterizations, there is a great deal that we do know. what we do know is that we have been dealing with a systematic effort to deflect attention

away from the decisions and determinations that were made at the highest levels of the department of justice where information was brought directly to individuals at the highest levels of the department of justice, information that was contained in wiretap affidavit that laid out in explicit detail the matters related to fast and furious. mr. speaker, there is a famous quotation in the department of justice about the responsibility of the attorney general not being to win cases but to assure that justice is pursued and retained. mr. speaker, it is incumbent and a responsibility on this house to do what is required to do in this circumstance and to support the request that we be given the documents to obtain the facts that will allow us to draw the conclusions which i believe allow us to get to the bottom of this.

mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from maryland. mr. cummings: mr. speaker, i yield to the distinguished gentleman from illinois, mr. quigley, two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from illinois is recognized for two minutes. mr. quigley: thank you, mr. speaker. those bringing this contempt vote say they want to talk about gunwalking and how to stop it. ok, let's have that conversation. they say they want to stop gun trafficking and keep our a.t.f. agents safe. well, then, let's properly fund the a.t.f. which is the same number of agents since 1970. they say they want to stop gun trafficking. then appoint a permanent a.t.f. director which the agency hasn't had in six years. they say they want to stop gun trafficking, let's pass some laws which actually deter straw purchasers. straw purchasers concurrently buy thousands of ak-47's, lie on their paperwork, and the penalty is equivalent to a moving violation. they say they want to stop gun trafficking, let's give the agents what they have been asking for, the ability to

track multiple purchases of long guns. these long guns include ak-47's, assault weapons, and 50 caliber semiautomatic sniper rifles, the weapons of choice for international drug cartels. they say they want to stop gun trafficking, let's close the gun show loophole which currently allows anyone to purchase any gun they want without a background check. felons, domestic violence abusers, those with severe mental illness, even those on the terrorist watch list can currently walk into a gun show and purchase any gun they want. 2,000 guns were allowed to walk to mexico, but the truth is tens of thousands of guns a cross our border every year because of those lax gun laws. those bringing this contempt vote don't want to have this conversation and aren't serious about stopping gun trafficking. they simply want to embarrass the administration, even though the committee's 16-month investigation found no evidence the attorney general knew about

gunwalking, even though there is no evidence the white house involvement in gunwalking, all of which chairman issa admitted on national tv last week. so if we are going to talk about gun trafficking, let's be clear, this is about politics not safety. i yield back. . the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from california. immigration and customs enforcement mr. speaker, the -- the gentleman from texas. mr. issa: mr. speaker, this is the refusal of turning over documents, not whether or not it was his lieutenants or he who was involved in fast and furious. with that i'd like to recognize the distinguished former chairman of the judiciary committee, the gentleman from wisconsin, mr. sensenbrenner, for two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from wisconsin is recognized for two minutes. mr. sensenbrenner: mr. speaker, this isn't about politics. this is about the constitution. and it's about congress' map date to do oversight -- mandate

to do oversight over both executive and judicial branches of government. the president is asserting executive privilege to attempt to shield these documents. and he is relying on a type of primpling called the deliberative process privilege. however, that privilege disappears when congress' investigating evidence of wrongdoing. and in 1997 the u.s. court of appeals for the district of columbia circuit wrote in part, moreover, the privilege disappears altogether when there is any reason to believe that government misconduct has occurred. in another case, it was decided by the first circuit in 1995, it says that the grounds that shielding internal government deliberations in this context does not serve the public interest in honest, effective government. there has been misconduct that's already a matter of public record in two instances. the justice department wrote

senator grassley in january of 2011 saying that the a.t.f. sanction gunwalking across the border was false and it took them nine months to retract that letter. so they also led congress, and then nine months later they said, oops. maybe he with did mislead congress and we'll withdraw the letter. and in may, 2011, the attorney general testified before the judiciary committee that he first heard of operation fast and furious a few weeks before the hearing. over six months later, he conceded that he should have said a few months. now, this very clearly shows that congress has got the proliferation to get the -- to the bottom of this, and that the assertion of the executive privilege by the president and the attorney general is not based in law. we ought to go ahead and do our job and do our oversight, and

it's too bad that the justice department has decided to try to obstruct congress' ability to do it. pass the resolution. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentleman has expired. the gentleman from maryland. mr. cummings: i yield to the gentleman from virginia, mr. connolly, two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. connolly: the 112th congress is the first in history to hold a cabinet member in contempt. when they say it's not about politics, you can be sure it's about politics. the majority's irresponsible and unprecedented contempt vote brings dishonor to this house which has been so clouded in judgment, that it's incapable of addressing a fundamental separation of powers conflict in a serious and fair fashion. in refusing to engage in good faith negotiations with the

department of justice and the attorney general, the majority has exposed this contempt citation for what it really is, an extraordinarily shameful political witch-hunt aimed at trashing an honorable man. it's unacceptable. we're rushing to the floor, this unprecedented contempt resolution. yesterday, ranking member cummings sent a letter to the speaker highlighting 100 errors, omissions, mischaracterizations of fact contained in the contempt citation itself. rushed out of our committee last week on a party line vote. although some of the contempt citations flaws are simply misleading, others have significant legal deficiencies and they contain factual errors that call into question the contempt citation itself. for example, on pages 4 and 5, the charges senior officials at the department of justice headquarters ultimately approved and authorized operation fast and furious. however, the consempt citation fails to mention the committee hasn't covered no evidence --

contempt citation fails to mention the committee hasn't covered no evidence. on pages 16, 17, 19, 0, 21, 22, 25, 26 and 27, the contempt citation with not producing a series of document that the chairman only recently acknowledged, the department is prohibited by law from providing due to the potential impact on ongoing prosecutions. in fact -- i would ask the gentleman for an extra 20 seconds. mr. cummings: i yield the gentleman 20 seconds. mr. connolly: you had to his own subpoena to delete documents in this own category but his contempt citation has not caught up with his most recent version of his subpoena. clearly the majority has not taken the necessary time to properly weigh this very serious charge. regrettably, this deeply flawed and shoddy contempt citation is emblem attic of the majority's

reckless rush to judgment throughout this process. i have been deeply troubled of some of the very hostile questioning and the utter and complete lack of respect given to the attorney general of the united states. when this chapter of congressional history is written, it will be not a brave shining moment. it will be seen for what it is, a craven, crass, partisan move that brings dishonor to this body, and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentleman has expired. the gentleman from california. mr. issa: i now yield one minute to the very distinguished and very always participating member of the committee from new york, ms. buerkle. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from new york is recognized for one minute. ms. buerkle: i thank the gentleman for his steadfast work on behalf of truth and trying to get to the bottom of fast and furious. mr. speaker, syracuse, new york, in the heart of my district, is roughly 2,500 miles from rico rico, arizona,

where border patrol agent brian terry was tragically shot and killed by an ak-47 assault rifle that the united states knowingly allowed into the hands of a suspected gun trafficker. yet, every time i'm home, it is the issue first and foremost on the mind of my constituents. i listen to their calls, to their emails and our town halls. they want to know what happened, who knew what and when did they know it. they ask me, they ask washington, they ask the department of justice, how could the united states government, the pillar of hope and freedom, allow for one of their own representatives, one of their own good guys to be so helplessly gunned down by a suspected criminal? mr. speaker, i'm embarrassed to say after 56 days i still don't have -- 562 days i still don't have an answer for them.

the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentlelady has expired. ms. buerkle: may i have one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for 10 seconds. ms. buerkle: is this the hope that the americans were supposed to believe in? out of the supposedly most transparent government in the history of our nation? it is my hope, mr. speaker, that the district court judge will see through the attorney general's contempt of congress after it is passed in the house today. however, we must not be mistaken, even if the attorney general is prosecuted, the case is not closed. we must not forget that guns leaked through this program -- the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentlelady has expired. mr. issa: i yield the gentlelady 10 seconds. ms. buerkle: mr. speaker, after today's vote we must continue our effort to find more answers than there are questions relating to this administration's catastrophic

fast and furious. the american people deserve the answer and the family of border patrol agent brian terry as well. thank you. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentlelady has expired. the gentleman from maryland. mr. cummings: thank you very much. i yield the gentleman from missouri, mr. clay, two minutes, a member of the committee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from missouri is recognized for two minutes. mr. clay: mr. speaker, as a member of the oversight committee, i know that the gunwalking operations conducted by the a.t.f. under both the previous and current administrations were absolutely wrong. but the leadership of this house is focused on shameful election-year political posturing instead of the real issue. the justice department long ago ended the practice of allowing these guns to walk across the border, putting communities in mexico at great risk, but the same people who have

relentlessly pursued a baseless partisan attack on attorney general holder and the president have ignored the desperate pleas of the mexican government. to strengthen american gun laws and curb trafficking that gave rise to the strategy in the first place. but focusing in on the real issue would take time away from them playing politics with the oversight authority. those on the other side of the aisle claim to be concerned about powerful assault weapons crossing the border into mexico illegally. but how can they be completely fine with those same powerful assault weapons being sold right here in this country legally putting our communities at even greater risk? this is more -- nothing more

than a political witch-hunt. the disgraceful posturing that i have witnessed at last week's markup is continuing on the floor today. i agree it never should have come to this, but we are here debating this resolution solely because of the majority. they created the scandal and produced a showdown during an election season just to spear an honorable public servant and to embarrass his boss. i urge my colleagues to reject this partisan, unprecedented resolution. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentleman has expired. the gentleman from california. mr. issa: thank you, mr. speaker. it's now my honor to yield one minute to the distinguished speaker of the house, john boehner. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from ohio, the speaker of the house, is recognized. the speaker: i want to thank my colleague for yielding. it's important for the american people to know how we got here and to know the facts of this

case. the congress asked the justice department for the facts related from the fast and furious and the events that led to the death of u.s. border patrol agent brian terry. the justice department did not provide the facts and the information that we requested. instead, the information came from people outside the department, people who wanted to do the right thing. in addition to not providing the information, the administration admitted misleading congress, actually detracting a letter it had sent 10 months earlier. i think all the members understand this is a very serious matter. the terry family wants to know how this happened and they have every right to have their answers and the house needs to know how this happened and it's our constitutional duty to find out. so the house oversight and

government reform committee issued a lawful and narrowly tailored subpoena. we've been patient, giving the justice department every opportunity to comply so that we can get to the bottom of this for the terry family. we have shown more than enough good faith, but the white house has chosen to invoke executive privilege. that leaves us no other options. the only recourse left of the house is to continue seeking the truth and to hold attorney general in contempt of congress . now, i don't take this matter lightly, and i would frankly hope it would never come to this. the house's focus is on jobs and the economy, but no justice department is above the law and no justice department is above the constitution which each of us have sworn an oath to uphold. so i ask the members of this

body to come together and to support this resolution so that we can seek the answers that the terry family and the american people deserve. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentleman has expired. the gentleman from maryland. mr. cummings: let me just say -- i yield myself one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. cummings: let me say in response to the speaker, we too are saddened by the death of border patrol agent brian terry who gave his life, service to his country on december 15, 2010. but, mr. speaker, despite -- but despite what my colleagues have claimed, this contempt vote is not about getting documents that show how gunwalking was initiated and utilized in operation fast and furious. the only documents in dispute are documents created fast and furious ended and after brian terry's death, but we pledge to

continue to find all the answers with regard to the death of brian terry. with that i yield the distinguished gentleman from massachusetts, mr. lynch, two minutes, a member of the committee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized for two minutes. mr. lynch: thank you, mr. speaker. i would add that we have 31 democrats that signed a letter to the department of justice and to the white house in the aftermath of agent terry's death to fully cooperate in this investigation. however, i rise in strong opposition to this contempt resolution. while criticism of the department of justice for oversight of the so-called gun walking operation during both the bush administration and the current administration, criticism may be warranted, a finding of contempt against a sitting attorney general of the

united states is most certainly not. and determining whether this house should hold our highest ranking national law enforcement officer in contempt of congress, let us remember that up until last week, the majority of our committee had been demanding the production of documents that our attorney general is legally prohibited from disclosing. and that has caused much of the delay here. in other words, mr. holder would have broken the law and likely compromised existing criminal prosecutions if he adhered to the majority's unreasonable request for materials relating to ongoing criminal investigations, federal wiretap communications and under judicial seal and dumonts also subject to grand jury secrecy rules. let us also be mindful we are considering the extent of cooperation or noncooperation of an attorney general who has appeared before congress on nine separate occasions, whose justice department has produced over 7,600 pages of documents

to oversight investigators and who continues to offer significant accommodations to extraordinary and ever-changing requests for information. the majority continues to deny any and all democratic requests to publicly question, under oath, law enforcement officials including former director of the a.t.f. ken melson, the head of the very agency that held the gun walking operations such as fast and furious. it's clear that what began as a legitimate and compelling committee oversight investigation has deteriorated -- mr. cummings: i yield the gentleman 15 seconds. mr. lynch: in closing i urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to oppose this contempt resolution and i yield the -- yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from california.

mr. issa: i yield one minute to the gentleman from michigan, mr. walberg. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. walberg: there is no joy in today's action but the fact remains, 18 months after u.s. border patrol agent brian terry was murdered, the justice department has failed to hold anybody accountable for the mistakes of operation fast and furious. as a member of the oversight and government reform committee, i have witnessed firsthand the stone wall big the department of justice and attorney general holder. at every question, theti department has refused to acknowledge what they know about the gun walking tactics that led to agent terry's death. most recently, they have hid behind the president's erroneous claims of executive privilege, an action the president denounced as lacking transparency when he was campaigning. the department has stood in open defiance of congress' moral and constitutional obligation to conduct oversight of this affair.

the family of agent terry deserves to know who approved fast and furious. they have the right to know who had the power to stop this program before he was murdered and they need an explanation as to why the department of justice took nine months to withdraw their false denial that they had ever let guns walk to mexico. to some on the other side of the aisle -- the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentleman has expired. mr. issa: i yield the gentleman 15 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. walberg: to some it seems fine that the people who authorized this operation still work in the department of justice. they would rather play politics rather than uphold congress' right to investigate. this is about making sure another 2,000 firearms don't end up in the hands of mexican drug cartels and it's about bringing closure to the terry family. i urge my colleagues to support this resolution and honor the memory of brian terry.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from m.d. mr. cummings: i yield to the distinguished gentleman from m.d., mr. hoyer, four minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland, the minority whip, is recognized for four minutes. mr. hoyer: mr. speaker, this is a sad day for the house of representatives. it is an irresponsible day for the house of representatives. it is a day in which the majority party asked us to take an action that has never been taken in the history of america. never once holding a cabinet officer in contempt. of the -- in contempt of the congress. now there have been previous

contempt citations. some promoted by democratic committees and some promoted by republican committees. the average time between committee action and consideration on the floor of the house is 87 days. time to reflect on an extraordinarily important action. with consequences beyond the knowledge of anybody sitting here today. now i want to tell the chairman with all due respect, i think this investigation has been extraordinarily superficial. i think the chairman has failed to call witnesses that could in fact give relevant, cogent testimony. -- testimony on the issues to bear. that ought to be done. that is why i will strongly support the motion of the gentleman from michigan, mr.

dingell, who has served here longer than any of the rest of us, and who is one of the strongest gun control rights supporters in this congress, and what his motion says is, let us reflect, let us bring thoughtful judgment, let us not every time that there is the opportunity to choose confrontation over cooperation and consensus. that has been the history of this congress. competition over consensus every time. and america is suffering because of it. i ask my friends on the republican side of the aisle, who know me, to be a bipartisan member of this body. that believes in this institution. and who cares about its actions and the precedent they will set. don't do this.

vote for this motion to refer. give the chairman they have opportunity he should have taken before to have a full hearing, calling former attorney general mccasey, calling the former head of the a.t.f. calling agents who were personally involved in this proceeding. i venture to say that there are very few members who will vote on this issue who have read the committee proceedings. very few members who have read the minority report or the majority report. yet they are about to take a historic vote to do what has never been done by any congress, 111 congresses did not take this action. this is not about republicans or democrats. this is about our constitution. our country. our respect.

for a nation of laws not of men. that's what this bill is about. we ought not to be voting as republicans and democrats. we ought to be voting as americans. americans committed to justice and fair process. i regret that i do not believe this committee has followed that. i believe that the political motivations mind this resolution are clear and pose a clear and present danger to this nation. may i have 30 additional seconds? mr. mcgovern: i yield the gentleman 30 seconds. mr. hoyer: i thank the gentleman from massachusetts. when we vote on this referral,

vote as americans, not as a partisan issue. you may have the attorney general in the future. it's not the question of the party of the attorney general. it is the question of whether or not this congress is going to provide for equal treatment of all attorneys general. and all cabinet officers. let us vote for this motion to refer and give the committee the opportunity it should take. let us vote down this motion. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentleman has expired. mr. hoyer: let us vote down the motions for contempt. mr. speaker, i now yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. issa: mr. speaker, it is now my honor to yield one minute to the gentleman from arizona, an active participant and from the district from which this event sprung, mr. go

czar. -- mr. gosar. mr. gosar: finding the attorney neral in contempt of congress is long overdue, welcome news for the merp people and especially for arizonans. as i explained, mr. holder has shown his contempt and utter disdain for our constitutional rights, our border, arizonans and all americans. 115 members of congress agree that americans lack confidence in mr. holder and his department. every member of congress should do their constitutional duty and hold the attorney general in contempt today. the people of arizona, california, new mexico, and texas who deal with the unsecure borders and violent mexican cartels on a regular basis now must also live in fear of the firearms. some have said these charges against attorney general eric holderer racially motivated and i couldn't disagree more. the violent cartels armed by our government have no regard

for party i.d. or race. throughout our nation and specifically in arizona, folks are all political parties and all races are now living in danger of this lethal violence due to the actions of this administration. make no mistakes about it, today's vote is to deliver justice and accountability for the brian terry family and the over 300 mexicans who have died as a result of fast and furious. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has ex-priored. mr. cummings: i yield the gentleman from m.d. 30 second. mr. hoyer: in 2009, our speaker stood on this floor outraged about the process. we, too, areout raged about the process. we will not stand for this. i would ask my house republican colleagues and those who believe we should be here protecting the american people, protecting our constitution, not vote on this bill, let's just get up and leave.

my colleagues may well follow that advice. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentleman has expired. the gentleman from california. mr. issa: i yield myself 10 seconds. i have no doubt the gentleman will walk off the floor but his motion is asking us also to delay into an election getting an answer for the terry family. i know that is not the wise course and i stongly support that we do this today and with that, i yield one minute to the gentleman from idaho, mr. labrador. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. labrador. -- mr. labrador: i stand with a heavy heart in support of this resolution of contempt. it puts us one step closer to holding the attorney general accountable. he has not only failed to produce relevant dumont -- dock yulet, he has misled this congress and prevented us from uncovering the truth.

how can the members of the minority say that an investigation is superficial when we don't even have all the documents? when the attorney general was before the committee on oversight last year, i brought to light his historical pattern of willful ignorance, high temperaturing his lack of knowledge under oath. he knows nothing, he says nothing, and he seeks for nothing. never in my life have i met a man more unconcerned with the search for the truth. i have sense become even more disturbed by the depths to which mr. holder and his alryes -- allies will sink to stone wall justice. yes, this is an uns prekented day, i agree with you. but not until now have we had an attorney general have to retract so many statements made to the congress of the united states, the duly elected representatives of the people of the united states. let us vote to support this motion for contempt and i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from maryland.

mr. cummings: may i inquire how much time both sides have? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from m.d. has -- from maryland has 6 1/4 minutes remain, the gentleman from california has 11 1/4 minutes remaining. mr. cummings: i grant to mrs. maloney two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for two minutes. mrs. maloney: mr. speaker, the family of brian terry deserves our respect, our condolences and our best efforts to finish the mission, to put an end to gun violence on the southern border. but instead of going after gun violence, this investigation has gone after the man that tried to stop the gun violence, the attorney general. chairman issa has acknowledged that attorney general holder did not know about the gunwalking operation.

he has acknowledged that the president and the white house did not know about the gunwalking operation. both the white house and the attorney general have acknowledge that the gunwalking operation was a tragic mistake, that it was badly executed and that it originated under the brucks -- under the bush administration. it was attorney general holder that terminated the program and requested an extensive investigation of the operation and how it was conducted. and the documents that they are now requesting in this vast and -- in this fast and furious investigation have absolutely nothing to do with gunwalking. if they were really interested in discovering the truth, the committee would have called kenneth nelson, head of the a.t.f., as a witness. the chairman refused 10

requests for mr. melson. the republicans have not granted one single democratic witness request in 16 months, not one. this is not about discovering the truth. this is about politics. this has become an obsessive political vendetta for pursuing a political agenda in a season of ugly politics. if they were serious about ending gun violence, they would do what many a.t.f. agents have suggested and put some teeth in the law and that is why i authored with my colleagues a bill to make gun trafficking a federal offense and strengthen penalties for straw purchases. this unprecedented contempt citation is politics at its worse and why this body is held in such low esteem.

mr. issa: i ask the statement by the terry family be placed in the record at this time. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, it will be placed in the record. mr. issa: i'm sure the gentlelady from new york recognizes the right of a minority hearing has not been exercised and that would have been answered the questions as they are well aware of bringing kenneth melson before the committee. they did not exercise their right. with that i yield a minute to the gentleman from florida, the senior member of the committee, mr. mica. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida is recognized for one minute. mr. mica: thank you for yielding. when the founding fathers created our government and established the committees in congress, that authorizing committees -- they had authorizing committees, they had appropriating committees. the predecessor of this committee was established for a fundamental reason and that's to make certain that programs and funding were properly

executed and used by agencies created by congress. congress created the law that created the department of justice. congress funded the programs that are under the department of justice. it's our responsibility to investigate when things go wrong, and things went wrong. an agent of the united states was murdered with weapons which were funded by the agency that we created. all we have asked for is the documents. all we want are the facts, and we have been thwarted. eric holder, attorney general of the united states, the highest judicial enforcement officer of the united states, has been in contempt, is in contempt and is showing contempt for the congress and the responsibility under the constitution of this important committee of congress. i urge adoption of the contempt resolution against the attorney general. i yield back the balance of my

time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from maryland. mr. cummings: mr. speaker, i grant the gentleman from california, mr. schiff, two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized for two minutes. mr. schiff: i thank the gentleman for yielding and i rise in strong opposition to these contempt resolutions. i spent six years as an assistant u.s. attorney and i have greated a mir mation and respect for the hardworking men and women of the department. i have great respect for our attorney general who i think has been a superb attorney general and is a man of integrity. i like most americans would like to know about the facts of fast and furious, about the problem of guns crossing our border, the horrendous violence south of our border, but what we do today will shed no light on that. what we do today will not improve the situation in terms of gun violence that's claimed the lives of 10's of thousands of -- tens of thousands of mexican citizens and claimed the lives of americans. what we are doing today is

simply a partisan abuse of the contempt power. 13% of the american people think highly of congress and to date those 13% are wondering why. what we do will cause no injury to the department, but it will cause great injury to this house. the justice department, after providing 8,000 documents and extensive testimony, is now being required to turn over privileged materials. and like all administrations before it, it has reluctantly used the executive privilege to respectfully refuse to provide materials it cannot provide. and so now here we are bringing a contempt motion against the attorney general which our committee chairman acknowledges was not aware of fast and furious. they don't expect any documents to show you about fast and furious and yet we are going to hold this cabinet officials in

contempt? that is an outrageous abuse of the contempt power. what will happen when this congress actually needs to use the contempt power for legitimate purpose? will anyone still recognize it? i urge the speaker to withtraw this motion as indeed speaker gingrich withdrew the motion in his stay and let the parties work this out. we both know, democrats and republicans, how this will end. it will end months from now. let's end this partisan exercise now. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentleman has expired. mr. schiff: i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california. mr. issa: i yield myself 15 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for 15 seconds. mr. issa: i respect my colleague from california. we came into congress together some 12 years ago, but the fact is he talked everything except the fact that congress was lied

to in a letter. 10 months went by. we're only asking for information about the false statements made to congress during there intervening period and nothing more. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. mr. issa: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from maryland. mr. cummings: i yield to the leader, ms. pelosi, 30 seconds. one minute. sorry. the speaker pro tempore: the minority leader is recognized. ms. pelosi: i thank you, mr. speaker. i thank the gentleman for yielding. i commend him for his extraordinary patriotism, for his commitment to upholding our oath of office to protect and defend the constitution and for recognizing full well the congressional role of oversight of all branches of government. i think we all share that view that congress has a legitimate role to play in oversight and

thus your committee has so much jurisdiction and i respect that. i think we all also agree -- i think we all very, very much agree that we are very sad and seek justice for the family of border patrol agent brian terry . his loss is a tragedy for all who knew him, for all of us who care about him and we offer our condolences to his family. so sad. but that's not what we're here to debate. what we agree upon. what we're here to debate is something very, very large because it is a major disagreement between the two sides of the aisle here, and i'm sorry to say that, about

what our responsibilities are to the constitution of the united states. the constitution says -- it requires congress and the gleck tif branch to avoid unnecessary -- gleck tif branch to avoid unnecessary conflict and seek accommodations that serves both interests. that's how the constitution guides us. as attorney general william smith who served under president ronald reagan said, the accommodation required is not simply an exchange of concessions or a test of political strength. it is an obligation of each branch to take -- to make a principled effort to acknowledge and if possible to meet the legitimate needs of the other branch. mr. speaker, on the floor today , the republicans in congress are not taking a principled -- making a principled effort to

acknowledge or meet the legitimate needs of the other branch. what they are doing is exploiting a very unfortunate circumstance for reasons that i cannot even characterize so i won't, but i will say this. without any fear of contradiction, the premise -- the basic premise that this debate is predicated on today is a false premise. it's factually not true. how many more ways can i say that? and so we have a debate predicated on a false premise and what can that lead to that has any good outcome? it is a situation where we have a contempt of congress

resolution against a sitting cabinet member which is the first time in the over 200-year history of our country that this has ever happened. again, what is the motivation? secondly -- and that's why i quoted the constitution -- this motion is not a principled effort to resolve the issue. if it were we would not be able to measure in hours and days, not even weeks, rush the railroading of a resolution of a contempt of congress that the republicans passed last week and are bringing this week to the house floor. i say this because i took considerable heat myself when we brought contempt charges

against two staff people at the white house. josh bolten and harriet miers 4 1/2 years ago. we were asking for some papers. we got nothing. as i say to my friends, not even a wrapper off of a piece of gum. nothing. stonewall. nothing. and yet our chairman at the time of the judiciary committee, mr. conyers, and our house leadership, mr. hoyer and others, kept saying, find a way . exhaust every remedy so that we do not have to take this action of bringing a contempt charge to the floor of the house. for over 200 years -- 200 days -- for over 200 days we tried, we tried, we tried to resolve the situation.

and when we could not we brought it to the floor, two staff people at the white house. in stark contrast to the rush of one week to the next, not even factual charge against the attorney general of the united states. it may just be a coincidence. i don't know. that the attorney general of the united states, the chief legal officer of the country, have the responsibility to fight voter suppression, which is going on in our country, that he has refused to defend the constitutionality of doma because he doesn't believe it's constitutional or has major disagreements on immigration which falls under --

enforcement of immigration law. and may just be a coincidence that those are part of his responsibilities. or maybe it isn't. but the fact is that the chief legal officer of our country, and his staff, have to spend enormous energy, psychic, intellectual, and time, dealing , dealing with this unprincipled effort on the part of the republicans. just when you think you have seen it all, just when you think they couldn't possibly go any further over the edge, they come up with something like this. it's stunning. it really is. and i don't mean that as in it's beautiful. it's stunning. it stops you in your tracks.

you say how far will they go? have they no limits? apparently not. and so the temptation is to say , let's just ignore the whole thing. do not dignify what they are doing by even being present on the floor and they do -- when they do this heinous act. first time in the history of our country to bring a contempt against the cab -- against a cabinet officer. you would think they'd be more careful about what they say, but being careful about what they say is aparently not part of their agenda. and so i know in our caucus, there's a mixed response to this. they're acting politically, we should act politically. we shouldn't vote on this, i

want to vote no. i think members have to make their own decision about that. i'm very moved by the -- i'm very moved by the efforts of our congressional black caucus to say that they're going to walk out on this. walk out on this. and perhaps that's the best approach for us to take. how else can we impress upon the american people without scaring them about what is happening here? what is happening here? what is happening here? it's shameful. what is happening here is something we all have an obligation to speak out against. because i'm telling you, it's

eric holder today, it's anybody else tomorrow, any charge they can drum up. and the fact is, and has been said, the fact is that the papers that they have seen, they know are exculpatory. that means there's no blame on the attorney general. and they know that. and that's why they don't want to bring those responsible for this before their committee and that's why i commend chairman dingell for his leadership and the motion he will bring to the floor momentarily, a motion of referral. so that we can get to the bottom of this. so that we can see how this happens. so that we can offer some solace to brian terry's family. and so that we can have some

sense of decency about what should happen on the floor of the house and when it goes -- it seems to me the more baseless the charge, the higher up they want to go with the contempt. the less they have to say that is real, the higher up they want to bring the contempt charge. i have always tried to make it a habit of not questioning the motivation of people. they believe what they believe. we believe what we believe. and we act upon our beliefs. it always interested me that in this congress somebody can bring something to the floor that is not true, but if i were

to call someone a misrepresenter of that information, my words would be taken down. so i guess that gives them liberty to say anything. because it's in the form of a motion. but let's make sure that we all take responsibility for doing the right thing by not letting there be an abuse of power and a-- an abuse of this floor of the house and an abuse of the time of the exec tiff branch and abuse of a -- of the time of a member of the cabinet who has serious responsibilities to our country. i urge my colleagues to do what they want as far as walking off. i, myself, had said i was coming to this floor to vote against this resolution. i thought it was so wrong that

there was no question to take the opportunity to vote no. but listening to the debate, almost unbelievable, not that what they're saying is believable but unbelievable that they would say it. so now i say to those who have a doubt about how they want to proceed that instead of doing what i said before, which was just to come and to treat this as an act of -- a bill before the congress a resolution before the congress and express my no, listening to the unconscionable presentation, i want to join my c.b.c. colleagues in boycotting the vote when we have the walkout after the debate over mr. dingell's -- we all take our responsibility seriously here. one of them, first and foremost, is support, uphold

and defend the constitution of the united states. that constitution requires the congress and the executive branch, i'll end as i began, to avoid unnecessary conflict and seek accommodation to serve both interests, the executive branch and the legislative branch. we are not upholding that aspect of the constitution. i urge my colleagues to vote no, or no vote. but to seriously reject and let's hope that this will not be repeted. but i'm telling you, if eric hold -- it's eric holder one day, you don't know who it is the next because of the frivolousness with which they treat a serious responsibility of the house of representatives. it's appalling. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back her time. the gentleman from california. mr. issa: as i know the former

speaker of the house knows, the attorney general is being hold in contempt as the custodian of the records for refusing to deliver them, not because we got to choose how far up or not up we got to go. with that, i recognize the gentleman from utah, mr. chaffetz, for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. chaffetz: thank you, mr. speaker. leader pelosi seriously questioned our motivations here. let me be crystal clear what my motivation is. we have a dead united states agent. meff more than -- we have more than 200 dead people in mexico. we have more than 2,000 weapons knowingly, willfully given to the drug cartels. more than 1,000 of those weapons are still missing. most of them are ak-47's. we have a duly issued subpoena that has not been responded to. on february 4, 2011, on department of justice letterhead they presented a letter that was a lie. it took them nine to 10 months to provide that information to say, whoops, sorry.

that's not good enough. this is not about eric holder. this is about the department of justice and justice in the united states of america. and i would, hen back to the june 3, 2011 letter that 31 democrats, brave democrats, sent to the white house. i read part of this. quote, it is equally troubling, remember, this is over a year ago, it is equally troubling that the department of justice has delayed action and withheld information from congressional inquiry, end quote. you went on to say, quote, while the department of justice can and should continue its investigation, those activities should not curtail the ability of congress to fulfill its oversight duty. we urge you to instruct the department of justice to promptly provide complete answers to all congressional -- mr. issa: i yield the gentleman 15 seconds. mr. chaffetz: nothing has changed in over a year but i can tell you this, brian terry doesn't have answers you don't have answers, i don't have answers. i want all the factings. that's what we're asking for

today, the facts, all of them. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from m.d. is recognized. mr. cummings: i reed mind the gentleman that all this started under president george bush. i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california. mr. issa: i recognize myself for 10 seconds. the distinguished gentleman can have his opinion but not his facts. fast and furious began under president obama and attorney general holder. i trust the gentleman would no longer make statements that are untrue. mr. cummings: i yield myself 15 seconds. again, the gentleman puts out statements in search of facts. i reserve. the chair: the gentleman from california. mr. issa: i yield one minute to mr. burton of indiana.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. burton: there's been a lot of hyperbole and a lot of repetition but a lot of things that have been said haven't been factual. brian terry was murdered. hundreds of people have been murdered in mexico with guns that went across the border. the justice department said in february of 2011, they had no knowledge about this. 10 months later, they admitted they lied. now, they said they didn't know and then they said they said they did. i don't know what you call that but to me it's a lie. then chairman issa tried again and again to get information so we could get to the bottom of this like the 32 democrats wanted and they refused. he sent subpoenas. they refused. they hid behind this being an ongoing investigation and they couldn't give those dumonts. -- documents. we got a fraction of the documents that should have been given to us. but they wouldn't do that. issa met with the attorney

general's people to try to come to some conclusion, some kind of resolution of this. so we wouldn't have to move the contempt citation. nothing. absolutely nothing. and then finally, at the 11th hour, when we knew that we were going to have to move with the contempt citation, the president of the united states issues an executive order claiming executive privilege. something funny -- mr. issa: i yield the gentleman 30 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. burton: something is wrong. something is being hidden from the congress and the american people. and no matter how much is being said here tonight, the fact of the matter is, we aren't getting the information. a border patrol agent has been killed, maybe two. hundreds of people have been killed in mexico with american guns that our government knew were going across that border and the attorney general has not been giving us the information, the justice department has been hiding it

from the congress of the american people and the president has claimed executive privilege. if that doesn't tell you something, nothing will. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentleman has expire. the gentleman from m.d. -- mr. maryland. mr. cummings: i reserve. mr. issa: how much time is remaining. the chair: the gentleman from -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california has 6 1/2 minutes remain, the gentleman from maryland has 1 1/4 minutes remaining. mr. issa: i ask unanimous consent to place inta the record letters dated may 24, 2012, may 30, 2012, and june 1, 2012, to -- all addressed to elijah cummings, ranking member of the committee. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, they will appear in the record. mr. issa: thank you, mr. speaker. i now yield to the gentleman from oklahoma, mr. lankford, one munn. -- one minute.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. lankford: this is a duly sad day. this is not stunning, as i've heard. this is a deliberative process that we tried to work through. we have a border agent that's been killed. we have hundreds of mexicans that have been killed. and the fingerprints on all that go straight back to an operation that was done by the federal government. this is a moment to get all the facts, to get it on the table, find out what happened and to get it done. we started with a subpoena process over 22 different categories. we narrowed that down to one. how do we get the documents from the time of february 4 of last year, when the department of justice told us one thing, and december, when they said, oops, and change thared story. we found out they had not told us the truth and in that time period when they staaled, staaled, staaled tissue when they stalled, stalled, stalled, we just want the information on that. how did this occur? this is essential because phoenix a.t.f. had a plan, fast

and furious. it was abriveed the u.s. attorney in that area and went up the food chain to department of justice where it was signed off. this is not irrelevant. this is essential that we know the process of how this was done. if we're going to fix this problem, we've got to know the facts. instead they're being withheld. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentleman has expire. the gentleman from maryland. mr. cummings: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california. mr. issa: mr. speaker, point of inquiry, do i have the right to close? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california has the right to close. mr. issa: i reserve my right to close. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland. mr. cummings: do you have any more speakers? mr. issa: no, i do not. mr. cummings: mr. speaker, as the democratic leader said, there's no doubt that the constitution gives congress the right and responsibility to investigate, but the

constitution also requires something else. it requires congress and the executive branch to avoid unnecessary conflict and deceit, accommodations that serve both of their interests. in this case the attorney general has testified nine times. he's provided thousands of pages of documents. he's provided 13 pages of deliberative internal document and he's willing to provide even more to meet the recent demands of chairman issa. but house republican leaders are not honoring their constitutional obligations. in fact, they are running in the wrong direction as quickly as possible. it's fundamentally wrong to vote in favor of this resolution at this time when the attorney general has been working with the house in good faith. i believe this action will undermine the standing of the house, will cement the speaker's legacy and will be recorded by history as a discredit to this institution. with that i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back his time. the gentleman from california.

mr. issa: i recognize myself for such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for as much time as he may consume. mr. issa: mr. speaker, there's been a lot talked about here about documents that the attorney general couldn't give us. these documents, documents under seal would be an example of documents that we should not see except encamera and we have taken great care to ensure that no one outside members of congress and key staff have ever looked at them. but i've looked at them, and what i know is that these documents read by any person of ordinary learning make it very clear that these wiretap applications read and signed by individuals in the department

of justice in washington, you read them, you now they were gunwalking. people will tell you differently. i give you my word, you read this, you know they were letting guns go to mexico. they knew who the buyers were, who the intermediaries were, who the recipients were and most importantly where they ended up. and this was part of evidence given to judges in order to get wiretaps, they were evidence -- there were evidence that they knew that in fact weapons had already ended up in mexico. that's before brian terry was killed. that's where fast and furious could have been stopped. that's where people could have been warned. in fact, that's -- at a time which a.t.f. agents in mexico city, if they punched in the serial number of a weapon found there, they got an erroneous, an error. they didn't get meaningful information because that was being blocked, not by a.t.f.,

per se, but by the department of justice under the auspices of the u.s. attorney and his bosses. now, you're going to hear this began under president bush. attorney general mukasey. i am going to tell you that's just false. what happened in previous administrations with some of the same local a.t.f. agents was they exercised extremely bad judgment. they did things and pushed on programs that i believe were poorly conceived and poorly manned and as a result they lost track of weapons repeatedly. that happened. and it was wrong. the u.s. attorney at the time even declined prosecutions because of failed techniques. all of these were shut down during the bush administration. president bush can take no credit for it. he didn't know it. as far as i know the attorney general didn't know. and anyone who saw the record of that should say, this was

wrong-minded. but during this administration, during the time in which the attorney general and his key lieutenants, including lanny bruer, were in charge they reopened the prosecutions from a failed program called wide receiver and they opened fast and furious. now, i'm the second child in a family. i have an older brother, and i learned at a very young age you in fact cannot when you do something wrong say, my brother, billy, did it. it doesn't work that way. you're responsible what you do. this happened under the attorney general's watch. but that's not why we're here today. we're here because when we asked legitimate questions about brian terry's murder, about fast and furious, we were lied to. we were lied to repeatedly and over a 10-month period. the fact is that is what we're

here for. the american people want to know if you give false testimony to congress and the minority leader talked about why is there such a hurry. why was there 10 months' delay? i was sworn in just a few days before this investigation began, and now we're nearing an election and we don't want to have this during an election. we want resolution for the terry family. the important thing is we know enough to know that we have people who have told us under pement of criminal prosecution they have told congress and their employees -- penalty of criminal prosecution they have told congress and their employees certain documents exist. we asked for those document and we were denied them. we can't bring kenneth melson here in good faith. if in fact there are documents he says exist, and they do and they will not be given to us, we want to have those so we can

ask the best questions. you heard earlier that in fact we denied somehow due process to the minority. my ranking member's very capable and has for minority days, meetings exclusively for him, and he didn't do it. when we had a.t.f. and other individuals early on all of whom worked for this government, he didn't ask any. it wasn't until he asked the attorney general to come in based on these false statements and final retraction that he suddenly wanted a previous attorney general who happened to say, no, i don't want to come. so on that particular day we would have had to subpoena him to get him in. i have no objection to having the former attorney general in. i believe that on his watch and his predecessor's watch and his predecessor's watch and for a very long time we have not done a good job of overseeing the actions of field agents when it comes to guns. but, again, we're here today for the first time in over 200

years to deal with an attorney general who has flat refused to give the information related to lies and a cover-up exclusively within his jurisdiction. lies and a cover-up exclusively in his jurisdiction. >> the case was referred to a record. -- federal court. our coverage is courtesy of wvuv tv in new orleans. >> good afternoon.

today's boat is the inevitable -- a vote is the culmination of a misguided and politically motivated investigation during an election year. over the past year and a half, congressman issa and others have focused on politics over public safety. this led to a series of flawed law enforcement operations. instead of helping to protect the law enforcement agents like brian terry to keep us safe, they have led us to an unnecessary and unwarranted the outcome. during this time, the men and women of the department of justice and i have focused on what should and must be our top party -- protecting the american people. concerns about operation fast and furious can to light and i took action. i ordered an independent

investigation into what happened. we learned that the flawed tactics used in this operation began in previous administrations, and i make sure they ended in this one. i also make sure that agents and prosecutors across the country knew that such tactics must never be used again. i put in place policies, new safeguards, and new leadership to make certain of this, and took extraordinary steps to assure congressional oversight. let me be very clear. that was my response. any suggestion to the contrary is simply not consistent with the facts. i had hoped that congressional leaders would be good faith partners in this, and some more. others, however, have devoted time and attention to making reckless charges, and supported by fact, and two advancing truly

absurd, truly absurd conspiracy theories. unfortunately, the same members were nowhere to be found when the justice department and others invited them to help look for real solutions to the terrible problem of violence on both sides of us southwest border. that is tragic and is also irresponsible. the problem with drugs and weapons trafficking across the border is a real and significant public safety threat. it deserves the attention of every leader in washington. in the face of these and other challenges, the justice department has continued to move forward in fulfilling its critical law enforcement ron sibylla -- responsibilities, whether it is prosecuting, health care fraud, achieving a market sentiment, taking aggressive action to protect the most vulnerable among us, or challenging superb -- proposed

redistricting that would disenfranchise millions of voters. this department of justice has not been afraid to act, nor have i been. some of these decisions were not politically popular, and help to explain the actions taken today by the house. as attorney general, i do not look to that which is politically expedient. on behalf of the american people, who i am privileged to serve, i seek justice. recently, the justice department secured its seventh conviction in the mysterious plot our nation has faced since 9/11. two days ago, we departed more than $100 million in grants to state and create law enforcement jobs, including 600 jobs for recent veterans. this is the kind of work that we do in washington -- the leaders in washington should be striving to advance, at a time when some americans are in need of our help. i refuse to be deterred from it. i will not let election-year

politics and his bishops stand in the way -- gamesmanship stand in the way of progress. today made good political theater in the minds of some, but is a crass disservice to the american people. they expect and deserve far more. as a result of the action taken today by the house, and unnecessary conflict will ensue. my efforts to resolve this matter all -- short of such a battle were rebuffed by congressman issa and his supporters. it is clear they are not interested in seeking an end to this dispute. ultimately, their goal was a vote that they now have engineered. whenever the past, what will follow will not distract me or the men and women of the united states department of justice from the important tasks that

are our responsibility. a great deal of work remains to be done for the american people. i'll be getting back to it. i suggest that those who orchestrated today's vptote do the same. >> the u.s. supreme court has upheld the law. they kept the individual mandate for americans to buy health insurance, fighting the power of congress to impose taxes. you will hear reaction to the decision from president obama and mitt romney. house leaders nancy pelosi and john painter. harry reid, mitch mcconnell.

on washington journal, we will focus on the supreme court decision to uphold virtually all of the president's health care law. then from 8:00 until 9:00 eastern, we will speak with members of the house. illinois democratic r it is live on c-span every day at 7:00 a.m. eastern. the heritage foundation will host a forum on the supreme court's decision to uphold the constitutionality of the health care law. it will be live on c-span 3 at 10:00 a.m. eastern.

this was the scene outside of the supreme court on thursday across the street from the u.s. capitol. president obama said the decision was a victory for all people. the republican presidential candidate says those who want to replace the law will have to replace president obama. their comments are about 10 minutes. >> good afternoon. the supreme court upheld the constitutionality of the affordable care act. it was past two years ago. they have reaffirmed a fundamental principle that in america, in the wealthiest nation on earth, no illness or accident should lead to any family's financial ruins. there will be a lot of

discussion about the politics of all this, about who won and who lost. that is how things tend to be viewed in washington. that misses the point. whatever the politics, today's decision was a victory for people all over the country whose lives will be more secure because of this law and the supreme court's's decision. because this law has a direct impact on so many americans, i want to talk about what it means for you. if you are war -- one of the more than 250 million americans who have health insurance, you will keep your health insurance. this law will only make it more secure and affordable. insurance companies can no longer impose lifetime limits on the amount of care you receive. they cannot discriminate against trojan with position consist -- pre-existing -- against children with pre- existing conditions.

they cannot raise your premiums without reason. they are required to provide free preventive care, a provision that has helped 54 million americans with private insurance. by this august, nearly 30 million will receive a rebate from your insurance company because it spent to think -- too much on things like ceo bonuses and not enough on your bonuses. there is more. because of this act, people under the age of 26 jurors old, will stay on their parents' health -- 26 shares sold will stay on their parents' health plan. seniors will receive a discount on their prescriptions. it has saved more than 5 million seniors on medicare more than $600 each. this is happening because of the affordable care act. these provisions provide common sense production to to protections and they enjoy broad

popular support. all of these benefits will continue for americans who already have health insurance. if you are one of the 30 million americans who do not yet have health-insurance, starting in 2014, this law will offer you various quality insurance plans to choose from. each state will design their own menu of options. if states can come up with better ways, this allows them to do that. i have asked congress to help speed up that process and give states the flexibility in year one. once states set of these health insurance market places, companies will no longer be able to discriminate against any american with a pre-existing health condition. they would not be able to charge you more because you are a woman. the one that bill into bankruptcy. if you are sick, you have the

same chance to get quality health care as everyone else. if you cannot afford the premiums, you will receive a credit that helps pay for it. today the supreme court upheld the principle that people can afford health insurance should take the responsibility to buy health insurance. this is important because one uninsured people who can afford coverage get sick, and show up at the emergency room, the rest of us and paying for their care in the form of higher premiums. if you ask insurance companies to cover people with pre- existing conditions but do not require people who can afford to buy insurance, some people may wait until they are sick to buy the care that they will need. that is why even though i knew it would not be popular, we ultimately included a provision in the affordable care act that

people who can afford to buy health insurance should take the response ability to do so. this idea has enjoyed support from members of both parties, including the current republican nominee for president. i know the debate for this law has been division -- devices. i respect the concerns that americans have shown. a lot of coverage has focused on what it means politically. it should be clear by now that i did not do this because it is good politics. i did it because it is good for the company -- country. it is good for the american people. there is a framed letter that hangs in my office sent to me during the health-care debate by a woman . she did everything right for years. she bought health insurance, paid her premiums on time, but 80 years ago, she was diagnosed with cancer. even though she had been cancer

free for more than a decade, her insurance company kept raising her rates year after year. despite her desire to keep her coverage, despite her fears that she would get sick again, she had to surrender her health insurance. she was forced to hang her fortunes on chance. i carried her story with me every day with the fight to pass this law. it reminded me of the americans across the country who had had to worry about getting sick as well as the cost of getting well. she is well today. because of this law there are other americans who will not have to hang their fortunes on chance. these are the americans for whom we passed this law. the highest court in the land has now spoken. we will continue to implement this law. we will work together to improve on it where we can.

when we will not tdo is fight te political battles of two years ago or go back to the way things work. with today's announcement, it is time to move forward, to employment and improve on this law. now is the time to keep our focus on the most urgent challenge -- putting people back to work, pay down our debt, and building an economy where people can have confidence that if they work hard they can get ahead. i am accompanied as ever that we look back five years from now or 10 years and now, or 20 years from now, we will be better off because we had the courage to pass this law and keep moving forward. thank you. god bless you, and god bless america.

>> as you might imagine, i disagree with the supreme court's's decision. i degree -- agree with the dissent. what the court did not do on its last day of session, i would do on my first day of elected president of the united states. i will act to repeal obamacare. let's make clear that we understand. what the court did today was say that it does not violate the constitution. they did not say that it is good law. they did not say it was good policy. it was bad policy yesterday, it is bad policy today. it was that a lot yesterday. it is bad law today. the me tell you why. obamacare raises taxes on the

american people by about $500 billion. it cuts medicare by approximately $500 billion. even with those cuts, and tax increases, it adds trillions to our deficit and to our national debt and pushes those obligations on the coming generations. it also means that for up to 20 million americans, they will lose the insurance they currently have that they like and want to keep. it is a job killer. businesses across the country have been asked what the impact is. three-quarters of those surveys by the tape -- surveyed said that it makes some light -- less likely for them to hire people. it puts the federal government between you and your doctor. for all of those reasons it is important for us to repeal and

replace obamacare. what will we keep in place? what must be in place? one, we have to make sure that people will want to keep their current insurance will be able to do that. having 20 million people up to that number lose the insurance they want is unacceptable. number 2, make sure those people who have pre-existing conditions know they will be able to be in short and not lose their insurance. we have to assure that we do our state inhelp easch sure every american has access to affordable -- affordable at -- affordable health care. we need to help lower the cost of health care and health insurance. it is becoming expensive. this is a time for the american people to make a choice. you can choose whether you want

to have a large government, more and more interested in your life, separating you and your ndoctor. if you are comfortable with more deficits. if you want the government to put in place a plan that makes you lose the insurance relied. do you want to return to a time when people have their own choice in health care where consumers choose what they want. this is a time of choice for the american people. if we want to get rid of obamacare, will have to replace president obama. my mission is to do that. we return to the american people the privilege they have already had. we do not pass on to coming generations massive deficits and debt. we do not have a setting where jobs are lost. every once a bright economic future for ourselves and our children, we must replace

obamacare. that is my mission. i am asking you to try and me. if you do not want this, if you want a course the founders envisioned, join me in this effort to defeat obamacare.. help us to defeat the liberal agenda that makes the government too big. it is killing jobs across this great country. thank you very much. >> reaction now to the supreme court decision on the health- care laws from house leaders nancy pelosi and john painter. this is a little bit more than a half an hour. >> good afternoon. pretty exciting day.

the decision that was announced by the supreme court is a victory for america's families. it was a victory for american families and we pass the affordable care act and the president signed it into law. tens of millions of people in our country are benefiting from the legislation. children can no longer be denied coverage due to pre-existing conditions. young people can stay on the apparent policy until they are 26 years old. seniors are paying less for drugs. being a woman will no longer be a pre-existing medical condition. it is about wellness. it is about prevention and the health of america, not just health care.

it is pretty exciting. earlier this morning i met with our caucus after the decision was announced. it was no surprise to us. we knew that -- we knew that we were on solid ground in terms of interstate commerce as well as the constitution. it was a question of what the vote would be. with that confidence, we happily embrace the decision that came down. we can now move forward to the full implementation of the law. when that happens for the american people, the best is yet to come. i want to say a word about senator kennedy. i spoke to victor kennedy and patrick kennedy before coming here. i think them for the role they played, a lifetime of commitment to making health care a right, not a privilege in our country. he called it the great unfinished business of our society.

i knew that when he left as he would go to heaven and hell pass the bill. i am at work until this decision came down, inspiring one way or another. now he can rest in peace. his dream for america's families has become a reality. i would be pleased to take any questions. >> the president has said that the individual mandate does not tax. >> the court has upheld the legislation. i have to see the specific language. i think they identified with how we wrote the bill in the house as part of the decision. call it what you will. it is a step forward for america's family.

take this for an answer. this is a very good thing for the american people. when you are talking about is washington talk. what is happening out there is families with a chop with a pre- existing medical condition, which means for a lifetime -- with a chop with a pre-existing medical condition means they will no longer be discriminated upon. that is what is really important. technical terms are for us here. what mean >> the republicans say this raises the stakes for the elections. do you think this will reopen the health-care debate? >> i think we all have to take a step back and say what are we here? we are here to do a job for the

american people. we are here to act upon our beliefs and a belief that we have shared is that health care is a right, not a privileged in our country. we believe that health care bills needed to be passed so families would not be pulverized. we believe is about life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness that people can now pursue their aspirations depending on their talents without paying job blocked because a child has a pre- existing condition or pier of a diagnosed. they can be a writer. they can change jobs. this is about a responsibility to reduce the deficit. if there were no ne -- if there were no other reason to pass it then because of cost of

individuals, families, businesses, large and small, to our economy in terms of being a competitiveness issue and cost federal, state, and state budgets. we would have to do this. the politics be damned. this is about what we came to do. anytime we want to waste time saying what does this mean in terms of the election, we undermine our purpose in coming here and acting upon our beliefs. we are very excited about this day. this ranks right up there when they pass social security and medicare. it is being upheld by five justices of the supreme court. >> john roberts called this a gun to the head of state's unles

. why was it sign that way? >> with all due respect to your characterization, here is what it does. we wrote this very carefully because we want it to have balance in the legislation. we wanted to have legitimacy and be well received. it says for three years, states will receive 100% of their medicaid funding for this bill without any matching funds. i do not think that is a gun to the head. i think for the to that point, the house language has more clarity that we wrote in our original bill and it addresses that concern. a hundred% of the money without

matching funds has matching elements to it but not as fun -- as far as expanding medicaid in this bill. we are not bothered at all by the decision in regard to medicaid. we think that most governors would probably accept 100% funding without matching funds. >> are you going to [unintelligible] >> thank you for bringing up the content of congress. it would be mischievous if i said that it is not a coincidence that this is being taken up on the same day that

the supreme court decision came down. it is too much of a coincidence, especially when you think that the motion of contempt was passed out of committee one week ago. what the republicans are doing with this motion on the floor today is contemptible, even for them it is contemptible. the constitution tells us that they shouldn't -- says that the branches of government should work together to resolve differences with out any an upper hand or showing strength. words to that effect. there is an obligation on the part of the congress, the house of representatives, if it wanted to go for with such a motion to try to resolve it. try to resolve it is not sending

a bill to the floor of the house based on a false premise. this is not the truth that is on the floor today. a false premise. asking for a boat, it to guns, so they politicize it. 4.5 years ago we had a motion of contempt for to employees at the white house. because he was the keeper of the present's papers, for over 200 years -- 200 days, we tried to get information from the white house. they stonewalled it. nothing. month in and month out, the chairman of the committee and i said keep trying. keep trying so we do not have to bring a contempt to the floor. we want to exhaust every rimini. that is not what is being done

here. this is something that makes a witch hunt make -- look like a day at the beach. it is a railroad in of a resolution that is unsubstantiated by the fact. it is based on a force premise. coming to the floor of the house in a manner of less than two weeks we spent over 200 days trying to get word number one from the bush administration. these people have gotten thousands of pages of documentation. that documentation is exculpatory. i am just saying that there is an attitude in our caucus that we should not honor the process that is coming to the floor. i intend to stay long enough to vote no.

i will see what the will of many of our caucus think that we should do a complete walk off. i honor the wish of my caucus. i want to be there long enough the record ishat' straight on what is going on. we are very honored by the work of elijah cummings. i want to be there to support him. i want to speak firsthand about what is said on the floor following up on this. as i said to you before, this is only about they are trying to undermine a chief legal officer of our country, the attorney general. this is the first time in history that a cabinet officer has had a contempt of congress resolution on the floor against him or against her. i believe this is their attempt

to tie the hands of the attorney general, to undermine his effectiveness to address issues of the voter suppression that are going on in our country. they have many other complaints. they do not like the fact that he has not moved forward to defend the doma act. it is about a lot of things. that is why i say is contemptible. it is a misrepresentation. in some circles, they would call them lies. politics. an abuse of the power of the majority in the house on the subject. i will vote no as many times as i can today on what they are doing. i will make my decisions.

i support to walk off, whether my role -- i will make a judgment when that time comes. >> what is your message to republicans who are scheduled to repeal the health care bill the week after? >> i have not seen their hearing. have they had a hearing on this legislation that they will come back a few days after? are they going to have a vote to say if you are a child with a pre-existing medical condition and no water can be discriminated against, we will overturn that. -- and no longer want to be discriminated against, we will overturn that. if you are 26 white -- years old and on your parents' policy, pulled the plug on that as well.

they make their own decisions. it clearly points out that even with a decision by the supreme court and the law passed by the congress of the united states, signed by the president, they are still fighting a fight. they will always be the hand matings -- handmaidens of the special interests of our country. they fight for the health- insurance industry over and over again. this is at the cost of taxpayers. this is more of the same. it will be interesting to hear their arguments. if it is anything like mitt romney said, you cannot have it both ways. he says he will not be able to be discriminated against for a

precondition. he is for overturning the bill, as the four in dissent on the supreme court did. he said he supports that. that. yet he will take it -- yet he may take it out of his own pocket of people who have pre- existing conditions. you cannot have it both ways. i think this offers an opportunity for clarity as to what the bill is actually about. instead of being at the mercery -- mercy of a $200 million negative campaign the misrepresentation that they put out there that created such a scream of confusion that it is hard to talk about what the bill does. now that we have a decision and they are talking about overturning it, we can sit with clarity, this is what the bill does. this is what they want to take away from you. this is how they want to

increase your cost and let the public decide. thank you all very much. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> could afternoon. thank you for coming. earlier today i was at the supreme court to hear a chief justice roberts issued the decision on the affordable care act. while we respect the court, we

respectfully disagree with the decision. just because the court upheld the law as constitutional does not mean it is a good law. it is a terrible law. unprecedented government power. on the mentally changing the relationship between the individual -- fundamentally changing the relationship between the individual and government. the court ruled that the affordable care act is a tax, the largest tax in america's history. it is estimated that up to 20 million americans will lose their employer health insurance. it makes it harder for small businesses to hire. as a mother and wife making health care decisions like many families, we have already seen our premiums skyrocket on average $2,100 per family. for all of these reasons and more, the american people oppose this bill. the opposition has increased since the law has -- was signed

two years ago. that's what the republicans pledge to repeal this law. we are more determined today than ever to repeal this law. the supreme court spoke today but they will not have the final word. the american people will have the final word in november. >> i am an hayworth from the york. i am a physician and an ophthalmologist. i care for patients in the hudson valley for 16 years. i am here to represent patients and doctors across the country. my colleagues tell me that they are very concerned about their ability to deliver the care their patients deserve and that they have come to expect under the terms of this law. in particular, i am worried about melic -- medicare patients. this 2010 law takes half a

trillion dollars out of medicare. this directly compromises their access to care. it is unacceptable. we are result to honor the goals of that law which were the right goals, to have good affordable health care for all americans, affordable health insurance. to the wrong law. the cannot afford to employees -- impose a two trillion dollar bureaucracy on the american people. we can honor those goals in a way that makes sense. we are here to put patients at the center of health care. we are more determined than ever and the will succeed. >> renee elmers from north carolina. yesterday i said a new chapter

will be written for health care as a result of the supreme court decision. it is not a chapter i was expecting a cut it is one we will continue in the fight. i came to washington because of obamacare. as a nurse and with my husband as a surgeon here in washington now, we knew that we had to fight against this for health care. as a mother, i am concerned about our children. as a nurse, i am concerned about our seniors. this decision keeps in place $500 billion being cut out of health care for medicare for our seniors. it also continues the independent payment advisory board which will be 15 bureaucratic, unaccountable individuals who will make health-care decisions for our seniors and for our citizens. the fight continues. the uncertainty remains.

the vision that has kept me awake so many times that night as a nurse, seeing it myself holding the hands of a patient while the doctor comes into the room and says that their life savings treatment will be denied because the in the payment payment advisory board deems unnecessary. this remains in my mind. we are and will remain committed to this. we will repeal obamacare. and this will continue to be our fight. and then the chapter for reform with the efficient, accountable, responsible at care reform put in place. thank you. >> thank you and good afternoon. i am from the 2015--- congressional district of new york. while the court ruled this is a constitutional law, that does that necessarily mean it is good

policy. i am a registered nurse and since then a health-care attorney. i have been in health care for most of my professional life. health care to me is intensely personal and i'm very passionate about it. throughout the course of the last 18 months, i have had my hospital, my physician, i had tina citizens, i have had nurses come to me and say this law is bad. it is going to bankrupt us. it is going to affect the way we are able to provide care for our patients. so it may be constitutional but it is not good policy and as legislators, our primary goal leads to be to enact laws that do what is best for the american people. to make sure they have access to health care and that we do everything in our power to keep the cost of health care down. this law does not take the necessary steps to reform the cost of health care in this nation.

the president continues to say that if you like your health care, you can keep it. well i am here to tell you, i hear from my district all the time with a concern that that will not be what happens. so many people will put their employees into the exchange and they will lose their choice for health care in the united states. that is unacceptable as legislators and should be unacceptable for the american people. as was mentioned, today begins the fight. today begins another debate. today begins the two debate on how we are going to reform health care in the united states. thank you so much. >> good afternoon, everyone. the president's health care law is hurting our economy. it is driving up health care costs and making it harder for small businesses to hire new workers.

i think today's ruling underscores the urgency of repealing this harmful law in its entirety. what americans want is a common sense, step-by-step approach to health care reform that will protect americans' access to the care they need from the doctor they choose added lower-cost. republicans stand ready to work with a president who will listen to the american people and not repeat the mistakes that gave our country this harmful law. health-care coverage has become too expensive for to many people in our country. the number one concern for families and small business people is the cost of health insurance. the republican health care reforms will lower health-care costs. women make about 80% of the health-care decisions for their families in our country. a republican health care reform will ensure that families and doctors make health-care

decisions, not bureaucrats. >> good afternoon. if for nothing else, today's health-care decision underscores the importance of this election. the people of america are going to have a choice to make in november and clearly is a choice that will bear upon the direction of this country as far as the health care is concerned. the decision today really indicates we have entered an aged in which the government will be controlling health care unless something changes. most americans still like the health care that they have and the president has continued to say that his law will allow folks to keep the health care they like. but what we have seen is that is not the case. obamacare will conclude people

from having the health care they like. we have seen this lot increase costs and we are committed to changing that. we are committed to making sure we can return to patient based health care in this country where we can keep costs low and increase access. that is why we returned the week of july 9, i scheduled a vote for total repeal of the obamacare bill to worker on wednesday, july 11. in that way, we can clear the way toward try to focus on accomplishing a health-care feature that is premised upon patient centered care, lowering costs and affording better access. >> today's decision by the supreme court did nothing to end the debate in america on health care. the decision raises the question -- is the patient going

to have the decision making process or a government run health care? it is a debate that will drive the house and this nation. the debate goes much deeper than just the ability for the access and the cost. hasit's time when america had 40 months of unemployment above 8%, i am very fearful. the discussions i've had with small-business owners and the decision today will determine the decisions they make with jobs. the economy will not be turning around because this health care bill harms the economy. there are studies by the administration that shows it will take people off their current health care plans that they have. it will raise the cost. the debate has not ended. it has only begun. a group of individuals behind us will not be the only ones but across this nation, and will be

a healthy debate on policy. we look forward to working with those individuals and listening to the nation to solve health care that actually empowers the patient to make their own decisions. >> today was not a good day for freedom. it was not a good day for struggling american families who wish to keep the health care they have. i respect the ruling of the supreme court. i respectfully and vehemently disagree with it. for those who have concluded that it is constitutional, i remind them, a constitutional law does not make for a wise law. the trillion dollar deficits of the obama administration are clearly constitutional. they are not wise. the fight will continue. we believe the law as hurting

our economy and hurting jobs. every day i hear from small businessmen in the district i represent. they have spent three and a $50,000 in compliance costs and have laid off six workers. the lot -- this is a hundred billion dollars in taxes. premiums are up. the affordable care act has not proven so affordable. for struggling families. for taxpayers, much less a dwindling federal treasury. most importantly, americans want to be able to choose their own doctor. they want quality health care. it want access to health care. they want portable health-care at a cost they can afford. careresident's health threaten that. the supreme court has heard today and where -- we respect it. as the republican leader said,

second week of july, the people's house will be heard from and the people from america will be heard from. >> this decision was a troubling decision. thatclearly disagree with decision. as chief justice roberts says, it is not the role of the courts to protect the people from their political decisions. the people chose in 2008 and we are living under the consequences of that choice. the doctors and patients are troubled. this love -- law violates every single principle we hold dear as a nation in health care. whether it is accessibility or affordability, or high quality care, or choice for patients, this law violates the law and makes it more difficult. we will work together with their conference and the american people to make certain this law

is repealed and we move forward in a logical, rational, delivered with patient centered health care. patients and families and doctors making decisions, not government. >> you would like to ask a question from all you have to do is raise your hand? anybody wants to yell, that will insure do not call on you. -- i do not calling you. >> can you explain how [inaudible] sworn to uphold the constitution, you do not agree with the policy but is there not inconsistency there? you do not like the policy but you respect the decision of the court. >> the court makes a decision about whether this law is constitutional.

it does not mean that the law is wise. it does not mean the law is good for the country. billick through the decision today and the chief justice and his -- in his opinion outlines the fact that the commerce clause is not constitutional. it is a tax that can proceed because of the congress has the ability to impose taxes. the government could decide that we're going to tax you if you do not eat broccoli on tuesday. apparently, that is not constitutional but i do not think it is a wise law. all you have to do is raise your hand.

>> the senate was unable to [inaudible] what make it necessary to go ahead again [inaudible] >> i think the real outcome of today's decision is to strengthen our resolve. to make sure that this law is in fact repealed. we will work every single day and the american people will have a chance to make their decision on election day. elections have consequences and the election as a consequence of the most americans disagreeing. >> we surprised that chief justice roberts was the swing vote? >> i am blessed i am not a lawyer. it is not for me to decide. i am disappointed in their decision, they came to a

decision to my respected. >> a democrat say the fact that you're holding another vote to repeal is a sign that republicans are sore losers and there are laws that republicans have passed that they're not holding votes constantly to repeal. >> resolve. there is a lot of resolve amongst our colleagues and the american people to stop a law that is hurting our economy, driving up the cost of health care, and making it more difficult for employers to hire new workers. the american people want this bill repealed. they want common sense steps above -- about imploring them to choose their doctor. >> [inaudible] how do you think this will cut politically in the fall? >> we will -- the american

people will make that seven and on election day. >> do you think it will help motivate [inaudible] -- your course supporters? >> what i am concerned about is a law that is driving up the cost of health care and making and hire for -- harder for employers to hire people. >> this ruling that the penalty is having taxing power, [inaudible] would future republican powerhouses put in a penalty for failing? >> repealing this entire law is the right thing to do. it will help our economy and bring down health-care costs. it will save medicare from being cut by $500 billion and we can put in place common-sense steps that will help the american people have better access to the quality care they want. thanks, everybody.

>> eric cantor has announced the house will repeal the act a week from next wednesday on july 11. >> chuck schumer said chief justice john roberts's opinion upholding the health care law is a welcome display of judicial independence. senator schumer and other leaders spoke with reporters in the capital for 15 minutes. after this to hear from senate minority leader mitch mcconnell. >> this lot has changed the lives of millions of americans in so many different ways for the better. and soon virtually every man, woman, and child in america will access -- have access it can afford and the care they need. the supreme court has spoken. the matter is settled. with millions of americans still struggling in this tough economy, we cannot look back.

we need to look forward. we should not waste time we fighting old battles. -- re-fighting old battles. we should focus on creating jobs. improving the economy. republicans have made it clear that instead of focusing on jobs, they want to keep having this old political fight. republicans have announced one day next month there will have a vote on what, repealing as they say obamacare. it is a show vote. a show vote on votes and votes they have had so many different times to repeal the law. this is what my friend and republican leader said. "this does not mark the end of the debate. it makes -- marks a fresh start on the road to repeal."

that is what -- not what middle- class americans want to hear. we should be improving the economy, not wasting time on political issues. we will take up legislation to cut taxes for employees, employers, and these we want to make sure that these employers who decide to buy a new piece of equipment will be able to appreciate it this year. we want to make sure that when they hire new people there will be able to get a 10% tax credit for them. we will consider a bill to give incentives for corporations that started facilities at home and we will do everything we can to stop corporations from shipping jobs overseas. my republican colleagues should think hard about whether they want to continue living the tea party debate their agenda. one of the tea party's folks who

is a member of the u.s. senate said just because a small number of people said that is constitutional does not mean it is. can you believe that? that is what he said. it is time to start listening to the middle class. the middle class who so badly needs our help and republicans should stop fighting yesterday's battles and start working with us to put america's -- americans back to work. >> republicans said the four will care act was unconstitutional and unnecessary. today in this opinion, the supreme court made it clear that the affordable care act, signed by president obama, passed by congress, is constitutional. the highest court in the land has spoken and they have told us what we did fits within our constitutional authority.

is it necessary? i would take that issue on in my state of illinois with republicans to argue we should not do anything, explain that to the families come out the 102,025-year-old to now have health insurance through their families. explain that to the millions of uninsured people in illinois who do not have to worry about pre- existing conditions, denying coverage to a child or lifetime limits, cutting off chemotherapy mid-course. explain that to the thousands and thousands of senior citizens across america who are getting a helping hand paying for their prescription drugs. we also know that expanding medicaid offering the expansion of medicaid means people will be paying patients going into hospitals. today, the estimate only 1% of america will end up in the category of those who decide they do not want hilton -- health insurance at all.

those people are shirking their -- personal responsibility. when they're brought into health care coverage, it is fair for every family, every business, everybody in america. it is time for us to put some of these political battles behind us and join together on a bipartisan basis to not only tackle this problem, to make health care more affordable and more reasonable, to tackle the larger, more challenging problem of creating more good paying jobs in america. we'll come back after the fourth of july recess with a proposal to help small businesses hire more people. it would be a breath of fresh air if the bipartisanship that we've seen for the past several weeks in the senate will continue when it comes to the small business jobs bill. we should work together. democrats and republicans for affordable healthcare and morbid paint jobs in america. >> thank you. this is not the first time -- this is not the time for the supporters of health care to gloat, nor is the time for sour

grapes. justice -- republicans should not carry on out of pique. democrats remain willing to cooperate on potential -- on improvements but now that all three branches of government have ratified the law, the time for quarreling is over. the time for disputing its validity is over. congress should not return to its full-time focus. -- now return to its full-time focus. the issue of jobs and the economy in america. you ask people what they want us to focus on, they're not rehashing health care. there may be -- the american people want us to focus on jobs, the economy, health, and the middle class and that is what we will be doing the rest of the session even if our colleagues want to look backward.

it is unfortunate speaker john boehner and house republicans are plowing ahead with the repeal vote after the fourth of july recess. the republicans are trapped in a sense between their tea party base that wants to repeal this law at all costs and the rest of the country which wants them to move on. so far to republicans seem to be casting their lot with the tea party and this is a mistake. the public is fatigue with all these parties in fights. they want to keep reelecting them. republicans should not be so quick to dismiss another potential effect of this decision. the health care law could will receive a second airing with the public because of this decision, the courts delegation of the law may cause americans to

reconsider their opinion of it as well. there is a precedent for this. when social security was passed. it was decried as socialism. health care withstood a constitutional challenge and social security went on to endure as a cherished program in the country. the health care law is getting more popular with time as well as -- as more and more of it goes into effect. lastly, this decision preserves not only the health care law but the supreme court's position, an institution above politics. i and others have criticized the conservative bloc for its heavy- handed activists and -- activism. the chief justice in this case acted as the empire that he promised to be -- umpire he promised to be.

some have expressed surprise. he is the most powerful conservative in washington who does not have to worry about the next election. unlike the gop pose the elected leaders, robert can afford to follow lot rather than fret about his standing with the tea party. his was a welcome display of judicial independence. the supreme court should use more than one swing vote every now and again. >> today's victory was for the american people and now it is time for us to move on. i have heard from so many people in my home state of washington about the security that they have been waiting for when it comes to their health care. a woman came up to me on the street and said she had been diagnosed with cancer, was about to go into extensive chemotherapy, and was so worried

that a decision to undo the health care law would mean that she would lose your coverage. a business owner told me that because she was now getting tax credits for the first time because of the health care law did not have to lay off to employees this year. and to keep her business going. this is the people that they can -- the law can make a difference for. they want us to do the right thing and move to get the economy back on its feet and create jobs and getting this country strong again. this is what we as senate democrats intend to do.

>> ok. >> [inaudible] >> every governor will sit and make their state a better state and those governors who are saying some things, if they continue, there will wish they have not. there will not have the ability to help their constituents like those states who have it. >> the individual mandate is not a tax. do you think it is a tax? >> i am not here to give everyone my limited knowledge of constitutional law. i am here to say that the law has been upheld. it is good for the country. it is good for my people in nevada. it is something that we can look at, i do not have to worry about a child that is born with a cleft palate.

i do not have to worry about a child who shortly after birth develops diabetes. or as the kids who came to see me today, have cystic fibrosis that develops. i do not have to worry about them. all of them will be entitled to an insurance even though they have a pre-existing disability. the people who stay on their parents' insurance policy, they're benefiting from the slot. millions of senior citizens who have not had a donut hole filled, they can get wellness checks. i am not going to give you a dissertation on constitutional law. the law has been upheld and i am happy it has been. >> if the house takes a vote -- [inaudible] given the sixty vote requirements and the president's signature, is it a waste of time for the house of representatives?

>> they should be focusing on jobs. we have millions of people who are underemployed or unemployed. that is what -- we're here today. telling each of you we're focusing continually on job creation and we need the republicans to join with us. america needs economic help and just like our small -- we will vote the way to get back. employers want that to happen. they can write off brand new equipment. the question is are they wasting their time? the should be spending it on jobs. >> [inaudible]

>> at one time in my life i was really good with a yo-yo. governor romney must be really good with a yo-yo. at one time he is up and another time he is down. the only thing consistent about him is inconsistency. >> [inaudible] >> we passed a law. you cannot repeal it about -- by executive order. we're here to talk about jobs. >> [inaudible] in november, they could seek to

repeal as much of the law as possible. [inaudible] >> all the more reason the american people should understand we want to focus on jobs, not taking away benefits that millions of americans have today for sure. there is no more uncertainty. we're focusing on jobs. let them vote is on taking these things away from the american people, including the repeal this, it is a loss of $400,000 -- 400,000 jobs. we are here to focus on saving those jobs and creating more jobs. >> [inaudible] >> two and a half years ago, there was a piece of legislation forced on the american people than ever asked for and has been turned out to be just as disastrous as many of us predicted.

>> congressional democrats praised the 5-4 ruling upholding most of president obama's health care law. members of the house and senate were joined onhe steps of the supreme court by health care activist ron pollack. americans were promised lower premiums. they are going up. most americans were promised their taxes would not change. and they are going up. seniors were promised medicare would be protected. it was rated to pay for a new entitlement instead. americans were promised it would create jobs. the cbo predicts it will lead to

nearly 1 million fewer jobs. americans were promised they could keep their health plans if they liked it yet millions have learned they cannot. the president himself promised up and down that this bill was not a tax. this is one of the democrats' top selling point because they knew it would never have passed if they said it was attacked. the supreme court has spoken. this law is a tax. the bill was sold to the american people on a deception. but it is not just the promises about this law were not kept. it is that it made the problems it was meant to solve even worse. this oppose a cure -- the

supposed cure has proven to be worse than it is. dependants will talk a lot today about what they think today's ruling means and what it does not mean but i can assure you this -- republicans will not let up in our determination to repeal this terrible law and replace it with the kind of reforms that will address the problems it was meant to solve. we passed plenty of terrible laws around here that the court finds constitutional. constitutionality was never an argument to keep this law in place in. it is certainly not one you will hear from republicans in congress. there's only one way to truly fix obamacare. that is a full repeal. a full repeal that clears the way for common sense, step-by-

step reforms that protect americans' access to the care they need, from the doctor they choose at a lower cost. that is precisely what republicans are committed to doing. the american people were not waiting on the supreme court to tell them whether they supported this law. that question was settled two and a half years ago. the more the american people have learned about this law, the less they have liked it. now the court has ruled it is time to move beyond the constitutional debate and focus on the primary reason this law should be fully repealed and replaced. because of the colossal damage it has already done to our health care system, to the economy and to the job market. the democrat health care law has made things worse. americans wanted repeals and

that is precisely what we intend to do. americans want us to start over. today's decision does nothing to change that. the court's ruling does not mar the end of the debate. it marks a fresh start on the road to repeal. that has been the goal for more start. that is our goal now and we plan to achieve it. the president has done nothing to adjust the problems of costs, care and access. we will. i yield the floor. >> congressional democrats praised the ruling upholding most of president obama's health-care law. members of the house and senate were joined on the steps of the supreme court by health-care activists ron pollack of the

group families usa. this is a half hour. >> brother of rahm emanuel. only those in between the ages of 15 and 40 are worthy of health care. and that the federal government controls 100% of its. do you want to live a in a world where your 45 and you cannot have a psa test? my father would be dead under obamacare. thank god he got cheated because obamacare came into effect. he is almost 70. and in the eyes of president obama, he is a useless member of society.

this is my family. this is my husband's family.

>> i am chairman of the health education labor intensive committee in the united stes sent dick -- senate. the committee in a charge of past and the affordable care act. today's decision by the supreme court is a rigorous confirmation of the constitutionality of the affordable care act. this witness for america's families, businesses and our economy. -- this is great news for america's families, businesses and our economy. even bill ball will not be fully implemented for several more years, it is already b.j. even though the bill will not be fully at the met this for at several years, it has already made a big difference. 105 million americans no longer face long time capsule of benefits. more than 5 million seniors have stayed more -- saved more than

$3.7 billion in prescription costs. children can no longer be denied coverage because of a pre- existing conditions. today's decision puts consumers in the driver's seat. if protect more than $1 trillion in deficit reduction. today's decision allows us to continue our work in a place in the current sick care system with a true health care system. with the focus on wellness and prevention and public health and keeping people out of the hospital in the first place. the supreme court has made it clear what we have known all along -- that those try to block health care reform are standing on the wrong side of history. for those of us who believe that quality health care is a right and not a privilege, this is a great day. it is time for speaker boehner

and the republicans to put politics behind us, what does in ensuring that every american has access to quality affordable care that no person is denied coverage due to a pre-existing condition and no one has their coverage canceled when they get sick and to make sure women aren't -- are no longer discriminated against by insurance companies. i've often said the affordable care act is not like the 10 commandments chiselled in stone. it is like a starter home, suitable for improvement. i call on republicans to join us in making sensible refinement as we continue to implement the law. my advice to republicans is to bring their tool kits, not their sledgehammers. let's make it affordable care at work for every american. the choice is to go forward or be dragged back words. the great majority of americans and now the supreme court has said we want to go forward. the justices have spoken. let's get back to work building

a reformed health-care system that works not just for the wealthy and healthy but for every american. with that, i want to introduce a great partner who was bent in this fight from the beginning and who was written parts of this law, senator barbara mikulski. [applause] >> good morning, america. if you want to know what democracy looks like, come to constitution avenue. this is what democracy looks like. the congress voted on health care. the supreme court has ruled on health care. we now know that health care is legal, constitutional, undeniable and irreversible. let's hear it for democracy. the system works and it will work for the american people.

we will now be able to go forward with making sure that 32 million people have universal access. were guys sitting in their rooms decided to cut health care. now we know the people will get the health care they need another doctor says they need and they will be able to afford it. the crowds are cheering us on. for women, it is an enormous victory because today what we have been able to a firm is that insurance companies will no longer be able to discriminate on the basis of gender were women pay 30% more for their health care of men at the same

health care status. women simply being women -- no longer be a pre-existing condition. because we have had a section or because we of that domestic violence. we have to affirm our preventive health care where we will be able to get our mammograms a maternity health care and as they fought for the women, we have also fought for the men. it is very exciting here. open, free to all. god bless you, god bless america. thank god the supreme court follows the constitution. >> senator ben cardin. >> i have the honor of serving with senator barbara mikulski the people of maryland. i want to take her -- thank her

and my colleagues here from the house of representatives for their incredible work on behalf of the american people. this is a good day for the american people. they won today. it is also a good day for the rule of law. the supreme court's decision affirmed the proper role for the congress of the united states. it allows us to move forward with quality, affordable health care for all americans. healthcare is a right, not a privilege. it allows us to move forward with the reforms to protect consumers against the practices of insurance companies that would deny them coverage, pre- existing conditions that now allow families to keep their children on their insurance policy -- policy to 826. allows us to continue to expand medicare coverage for prescription drugs and wellness exams for our seniors. it lets us move forward with

quality health care for all americans and to do it in a more affordable, costa backed away. this is good for the taxpayers of our country. the important message from the supreme court is that it is time for democrats and republicans to move forward with health care. make progress to so that all americans can have quality health care and dental america. this is a message from the supreme court and this is what we need to continue to do. thank you. [applause] >> thank you, senator. i am a senator chris coons of delaware. this is an historic decision and an important moment for our country. the people of delaware, my constituents, my neighbors, friends like catherine and

melanie, have had their lives changed for the better by the affordable care act. for me, supporting the act has always been about the people whose lives are changed for the better rather than the politics being shouted by the opponents of this important bill. i am pleased that the supreme court today affirmed its role in our constitutional order by deciding in narrow -- on narrow an appropriate route still uphold the core elements of the affordable care act. the me tell you why this matters to real people. melanie first met my wife at an annual breast cancer walk and her story is heartbreaking. like a mother and sister before her, she was diagnosed with a near fatal breast cancer. her husband left her when he heard this news and she lost her health care, provided by her husband's employer. she cannot get health care through a new employer into lost not only her opportunity of getting life-saving treatment

but her home. facing bankruptcy, facing death, it was to the affordable care act that she was able to get health insurance despite her pre-existing condition that made possible care in delaware's hospital. another woman we have met who was contacted my office -- winner husband passed away, her daughter lost health care because she could not afford it. it is only because of the affordable care act that health care was creosote -- we is it for her daughter. senators and dozens of others can tell you dozens of similar stories from their state. it is time for us to work together, republicans and democrats, senate and house, to focus on the issues that matter to the people of america. providing affordable high- quality health care, insisting on progress on moving forward by

the then those who would fight to take america backwards. i'm grateful for this landmark decision by the supreme court today, upholding the constitutionality of the core provisions of the affordable care act. thank you. >> i am going to turn it over to rep keith ellison who will introduce the house members here and also from families usa. >> let's hear it for senators. [applause] by dr.lso joined pollack. let me tell you this. back in the day, roosevelt wanted to see health care for all americans. truman wanted to see it. kennedy wanted to see it. we all remember how president clinton fought for it. but today, health care for all americans has been found to be

constitutional. this is a great day for celebration. i want you all to know that we are out here today marking this victory, clear that the work we did to get us to this point was the right thing to do but also clear that we are going to head forward and continue to make health care to leave something that all americans can have and enjoy. i want to say that i'm so proud to be here with members of the progressive caucus and the progressive community who fought for health care and who will continue to fight for health care. they fought so hard and so long. we have more miles to go. let's take a minute to celebrate this moment, health care constitutional and irreversible. now let me say, come on up.

>> thank you. despite this film is next door, today is a significant day for the american people -- despite the still less -- the shrillness next door, today is a significant day for the american people. is that towards the fundamental right that everybody in this country should have health care. today it is a firm that a minimum level of coverage for every american is constitutional and right. and we celebrate that. more to gain? yes. today we have broken the ice on a decade old and ability to get health care in this country. today the supreme court affirmed that healthcare is constitutional and they should be happy with that. today is a victory not just for

president obama, not for those of us is supported but but for the american people on this long road to get this to this point to be -- to begin to create a climate where help tourism, the metal right -- a climate in this country where health care is a fundamental right. >> i am caucus woman carolyn maloney from new york. god bless america. god bless the constitution and got less and presidents that have made health care their top priority -- and god bless the presidents that have made health care of their top priority. is a great day for americans. for the 34 million americans who have access to affordable, available health care. it is a great win for our

seniors who will longer fall through the doughnut hole and for women who will not be discriminated against by insurance policy that historically charged them more for their premiums than their colleagues -- than their male colleagues. the nine coverage for pregnancy and -- denying coverage for pregnancy. it is a great victory for our country. now it is time to go back to work. creating jobs for a healthy america. >> i have a lot of members of congress waiting period -- waiting.

>> i'm congressman jerry nadler of new york. today the supreme court did not disgrace itself. in upholding the affordable care act, the supreme court has shown that even in a time when washington often seems to have reached new levels of this function, it remains a respect for the rule of law and for the ability of congress [inaudible] [applause] [applause] and there remains a respect for the ability of congress to the ability of congress to legislate on