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 use 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 thifloor 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 believle 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 serusly reject and let's hope that this will not be repeted. but i'm telling you, if ic 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 attorn 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, iis 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 curta the ability of congress to fulfill its overght 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. chfetz: 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.d. is recognized. mr. cuings: 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 reserv 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 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 i februaryf 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 is 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, y 30, 20, 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 minut the speaker pro tempe: the gentleman is recnized 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 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 departmt 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, staed, stalled we just want the information on that.

how did this occur? this i 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 beingithheld. 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 avoi unnecessary confli 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 staing 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 eveneclined 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 genel 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 very young age you in fact cannot wn 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 wre here for. the american people want to know if you give false testimony to congre 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 r 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 precessor's watch and for a very long time we have not done a good job of overseeing the actions of eld 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 house later voted to order 55-67 -- to rid 55-67 in favor of contempt. attorney general holders spoke to reporters for a few minutes after the house of those buried our coverage is courtesy of w.vue in new orleans.

>> good afternoon. today's vote is the regrettable combination of what's became a misguided and politically motivated investigation. by advancing it over the past year and a half, congressman issa and others have focused on politics or public safety. instead of trying to correct the problems, it led to a series of what law enforcement operations and instead of helping us find ways to better protect the brave law enforcement agents like agent friend terry -- brian terry, the lead to this unnecessary and unwarranted outcome. the man and woman of the united states department of justice and i have remained focused on what should and must be our government's top priority, protecting the american people. what concerns about operation fast and furious came to light, i took action. and ordered an independent investigation into what happened.

we learned the flawed tactics used in this operation began in the previous administration but i made 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 new policies, new safeguards, and new leadership to make certain of this and took extraordinary steps to facilitate robust congressional oversight. let me be very clear. that was my response to operation fast and furious. 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 work and some more. others have devoted their time and their attention to making reckless charges, and supported by fact and advancing truly absurd conspiracy theories. unfortunately, the same members

of congress 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 our southwest border. that is tragic and is also irresponsible. the problem of drugs and weapons trafficking across this border is a real and significant public safety threat. he 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 filling its critical of law enforcement responsibilities, whether it is with regards to prosecuting financial and health-care fraud, achieving a record mortgage settlement, taking aggressive action in protecting the most vulnerable among us, or challenging proposed voting changes and redistricting maps that would potentially disenfranchise millions of

voters. this department of justice has not been afraid to act. nor have i been. some of these enforcement decisions were not popular. and help to explain the actions that were taken today by the house. as attorney general, i do not look to that which is politically expedient. on behalf of the american people where privilege to serve, i seek justice. in recent weeks, the justice department secured its seventh conviction in the most serious plot our nation faced since 9/11 and two days ago, the department awarded more than $100 million in grants to save or create law enforcement jobs including more than 600 jobs for recent veterans. this is the kind of work that leaders in washington should be striving together to of advance. the time when so many americans are in need of our help, i refuse to be deterred from it. will not let election-year

politics and gamesmanship stand in the way of continued progress. today's vote may make for good political theater in the minds of some but it is that base both a crass effort and a grave disservice to the american people. they expect and they deserve for more. as a result of the action taken today, and unnecessary conflict will ensue. my efforts to resolve this matter short of such a battle were rebuffed by congressmen issa and his supporters. there were not interested in bringing an end to this the last disputes or obtaining the information they said they wanted. their goal was a vote with the help of special interests they have now engineered. what ever the path, it will not distract me or the men and women of the united states to protest the justice from the important tasks that are our

responsibility. a great deal of work for the american people remains to be done. i will be getting back to it. i suggest that those who orchestrated today's vote do the same. >> the u.s. supreme court yesterday upheld>> the u.s. supreme court has law. in a 5-4 ruling, the court kept intact the individual mandate for americans to buy health insurance, citing the power of congress to impose taxes. over the next two hours, you -- half-hour would your reaction to the decision from president obama, and gop presidential candidate mitt romney.

b#)2 record of the gold standard is a record low growth in the macro sense and a personal accountability and the banking. >> this weekend,lewis lehrman and james grant talk about returning to the gold standard saturday evening. this weekend, more from "the contenders," r series of a key political leaders who ran for president but lost the change our political system. that is it 7:30 p.m. american history tv this weekend on cspan 3. >> the heritage foundation will

host a forum on the supreme court decision to uphold the constitutionality of health care law. that will be live on c-span 3 at 10:00 a.m. eastern. new york senator chuck schumer says chief justice john roberts opinion upholding the health care law is a welcome display of judicial independence. senator schumer and other democratic leaders spoke for 15 minutes. >> virtually virtually every man and woman and child in america will get the health care they need. the supreme court has spoken in the matter is settled. with millions of americans still struggling in this tough

economy, we cannot look back, we to look for it. we should not waste time re- fighting old battles. we should focus on creating jobs. , improving the economy of the people of this country. republicans in congress had better clear that a set of focusing on jobs, they want to keep having this old, old political fight. republicans in the house have announced even a day early next month that they will have a vote on repealing obama care. it is just a showboats - show vote on votes they have had many times to repeal the law. "the court's ruling does not mark the end of the debate, it marks a fresh start -- a fresh

robust start of appeal." that's what the republican said. that's not what middle-class americans want to hear. we should be working to improve the economy, not wasting time on partisan political issues. in the coming weeks, we will take up legislation to cut taxes for employees, employers, and we want to make sure these employers decide to buy a new piece of equipment will be able to depreciate it this year, now. we want to make sure that when they hire new people, there will be able to get a 10% tax credit for that. we will consider a bill to give incentives for corporations that start facilities here at home and do everything we can legislatively to stop corporations from shipping jobs overseas. my republican colleagues should think hard about whether they want to continue letting the tea

party debate their agenda. one of the tea party folks who was a member of united states senate said just because a small number of people said that as 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 who so badly needs our help and republicans should stop fighting yesterday's battles. and start working with us to put americans back to work. thank you. >> republicans say the affordable care act was unconstitutional and the necessary

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. and it's time when america has 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. 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. the president's health care threatens 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. we'd clearly 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 i do not call on 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 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 the who decide they do not want 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. >> 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 e 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

>> this bill was not a tax. they said would never pass the was called the attacks. the supreme court has spoken. this law as a tax. the bill was sold to the american people on a deception. it is not just that the promises about this law or not kept, it is that it made the problems it was meant to solve even worse. the supposed to cure has proven to be worse than the disease.

the pundits will talk today about what they think today's ruling means and what it does not mean i can assure you this -- republicans will not 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 sell. -- saul. we have passed planted terrible laws that the court finds constitutional. constitutionality was never an argument to keep this law in place. it certainly is not when you hear from republicans in there's only one way to truly fix obama-care, only arizona one way to fix obama care and 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 2.5 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, the economy, and to the job market. the democratic health care law has made things worse. americans want it repealed and that is 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 does not mark the end of the debate. it marks a fresh start on the road to repeal. that has 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. mr. president, i yield the floor. >> reaction to the court ruling from mitt romney and president obama. >> as you might imagine, i disagree with the supreme court decision and i agree with the

dissent. what the court did not do on its last day in session, i will do on my first day if elected president of the united states. that is, i will act to repeal obama care. let's make clear that we understand what the court did and did not do. what they did was say that obama care does not violate the constitution. what they did not do is say that obama care is good law or good policy. obama care was bad policy yesterday and is that policy today. obama care was bad law yesterday and it is bad law today. let me tell you why i say that -- obama care raises taxes on the american people by approximately $500 billion. obama care cuts medicare, cut medicare by approximately $500 billion. even with those cuts and tax

increases, obama care ads trillions to our deficit and our national debt and pushes those obligations on the coming generations. obama care also means that for up to 20 million americans, they will lose the insurance they currently have, the insurance they like and want to keep. obama care is a job killer. businesses across the country have been asked what the impact is of obama care and 3/4 of those surveyed by the chamber of commerce said obama care makes it less likely for them to hire people and perhaps most troubling of all, obama care puts the federal government between you and your doctor. for all those reasons, it is important for us to repeal an report -- replace or obama care. what things must in place with the reform of our health care system? we have to make sure that people want to keep their current insurance will be able to do so. having 20 million people lose

the insurance they want is simply unacceptable. number two -- we have to make sure those people who have pre- existing conditions know they will be able to be insured and they will not lose their insurance. we also have to assure that we do our best to help the state in their effort to assure that every american has access to affordable health care and something that obama care does not do that must not be done in reform is helping lower the cost of health care and health insurance. it is becoming prohibitively expensive. this is now a time for the american people to make a choice. you can choose whether you want to have a larger and larger government, more and more interested in your lives, separating you and your doctor and whether you are comfortable with more deficits, higher debt on the coming generation, whether you're willing to have the government put in a planned a potentially causes you to lose the insurance you like or

whether instead you want to return to a time when the american people will have their own choice in health care, where consumers will be able to make choices as to what kind of health insurance they want. this is a time of choice for the american people. our mission is clear -- if we want to get rid of obama care, we will have to replace president obama. my mission is to do exactly that. we return to the american people the privilege they have always had. this is where we don't pass on to coming generations massive deficits and debt and we don't have a setting where jobs are lost. if we want good jobs and a bright economic future for ourselves and our kids, we must replace obama care. that is my mission, our work, and i ask the people of america to join me. if you don't want the course the president obama has put us on and that you want instead a course the founders envisioned, join us in my efforts and help was defeated obama care, help us

defeat the liberal agenda that makes government too big, too intrusive, and is killing jobs across this great country. thank you so much. >> good afternoon, earlier today, the supreme court upheld the constitutionality of the affordable care act. , the name of the health care reform would past two years ago. they reaffirmed the fundamental principle that here in america, in the wealthiest nation on earth, no illness or accident should lead to any family's financial ruin. i know there will be a lot of discussion today about the politics of all of this, about who won and lost that is how

these things tend to be viewed in washington. that discussion completely misses the point. whatever the politics, today's decision was a victory for people all over this country whose lives will be more secure because of this law and the supreme court's decision to uphold it. because this law has a direct impact on some americans, want to take this opportunity to talk about what it means for you. first, if you are one of more than two under 50 million americans already have health insurance, you'll keep your health insurance. kissell law will only make it more secure and more affordable. insurance companies can no longer impose lifetime limits on the amount of care you receive. they can no longer discriminate against children with pre- existing conditions. they can no longer drop your coverage if you get. they can no longer jack up your premiums without reason. they are required to provide free preventive care like

checkups and mammograms, a provision that has already helped 54 million americans with private insurance. by this august, nearly 30 million of you will receive a rebate from your insurance company -- 13 million of you will receive a rebate from your insurance company. there is more -- because of the affordable care act, young adults under the age of 26 are able to stay on their parents' health care plans, a provision that has helped 6 million young americans. because the affordable care act seniors will see the discounts on prescription drugs, discounts that have saved already more than 500 million seniors on medicare about $600 each. all of this is happening because of the affordable care act. these provisions apply common- sense protections for middle- class families and they enjoy broad popular support. thanks to today's decision, all of these benefits and

protections will continue for americans who already have health insurance. if you are one of the 30 million americans who don't have health insurance, starting in 2014, this law will offer you an average of quality private health insurance plans to choose from. each state will take the lead into law -- designed their own options and states can come up with better ways of covering more people with the same quality and cost for this law 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 up these insurance marketplace is known as exchanges, insurance companies will no longer be able to discriminate against american with a pre-existing health condition. they will be allowed to charge more because you're a woman. there will be able to bill you into bankruptcy. if you are sick, you will finally have the same chance to get quality affordable health care as everyone else. if you can of -- if you cannot

afford the premiums, you'll receive a credit that helps to pay for it. the supreme court also upheld the principle that people who can afford health insurance should take the responsibility to buy health insurance. this is important for two reasons -- one uninsured people who can afford coverage get sick and show up at the emergency room for care, the rest of us end up paying for their care in the form of higher premiums. second, if you ask insurance companies to cover people with pre-existing conditions but don't require people who can afford to buy their own insurance, some folks might wait until they're sick to buy the care they need which would also drive up everybody else's premiums. that is why even though i knew it would not be political possible and resisted the idea when i ran for this office, we ultimately included a provision in the affordable care act that people who can afford to buy health insurance should take the responsibility to do so. in fact, this idea has enjoyed

support from members of both parties including the current republican nominee for president. the debate over this law has been divested. i respect the very real concern is that millions of americans have shared. i know a lot of coverage for this health care debate is focused on what it means politically. it should be pretty clear by now that i did not do this because it was good politics. i did it because i believed 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 sent to me during the health- care debate by a woman named natoma canfield. for years, she did everything right, bought health insurance, pater prints on time but 18 years ago she was diagnosed with cancer. given that she had been cancer free for more than a decade, her insurance company kept checking out her rates year after year.

despite her desire to keep your coverage, despite her fears that she would get sick again, she had to surrender her health insurance and was forced to hang her fortunes on chance. i carried her story with me everyday in the fight to pass this law. reminded me of all americans all across the country who have had to worry not only about getting sick but about the cost of getting well. she is well today and because of this law there are about -- other americans, sons and daughters, brothers and sisters, fathers and mothers 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 and we will work together to improve on a weekend. what we won't do and what the country cannot afford to do is reflect the political battles of

two years ago or go back to the way things work. with today's announcement, it is time for us to move forward to implement and were necessary improve on this lot. now's the time to keep our focus on the most urgent challenge of our time, putting people back to work, paying down our debt, and building an economy where people can have confidence that they work hard, they can get ahead. today, i am as confident as ever that when we look back five years from now or 10 years from no 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. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> the heritage foundation will host a forum this morning on the

supreme court decision to uphold the constitutionality of the health-care law. that will be live on c-span 3 at 10:00 a.m. eastern. in a few moments, today's headlines and your phone calls live on "washington journal." the house is back in session in a couple of hours at 9:00 eastern for members to consider bills regarding transportation and housing spending as well a student loans and highway programs. in a few moments, will focus on the supreme court's decision to up hold virtually all of the president's health-care law beginning with health affairs journal. from 8:00-9:00 eastern, we will speak with members of the house.