over again and thinking you're going to get different results. you are not going to get a different result. the fact is that this is about votes. we have a new crop of freshmen who are getting their campaigns ready and they've got to have the check in the box that says i voted against obamacare. vote no. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan is recognized. mr. camp: i yield one minute to the distinguished member of the ways and means committee, the gentlewoman from tennessee, mrs. black. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. mrs. black: thank you for yielding. i am outraged that the internal revenue service has been targeting conservative groups since as early as 2010. this is not a republican or democrat issue. this is a first amendment issue. one that should be a wakeup call about the dangers of the new expansive powers afforded to the i.r.s. under obamacare. no government agency, particularly one with such corruption and apparent disregard for the constitution

as the i.r.s. has any business accessing or monitoring americans' personal health information. as i speak here today, government bureaucrats are building the federal data services hub, the largest personal information database ever created by the u.s. government and because of obamacare, five midge government agencies are compiling information for the data hub. including the i.r.s., h.h.s., department of justice, department of homeland security and social security administration. what this hub means is government bureaucrats are gaining unprecedented access and power over the american people's financial health, personal information through the implementation of obamacare. . the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. the gentlelady is recognized for 30 seconds. mrs. black: how can president obama and congressional democrats support obamacare, a law that gives more power to

the i.r.s.? ultimately, the i.r.s. scandal is yet another example of why obamacare must be repealed for the sake of our health care, our economy and our constitutional freedom. thank you and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. the gentleman from michigan is recognized. mr. levin: i now yield one minute to the gentleman from massachusetts, a distinguished member of our committee, mr. neal. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. neal: thank you, mr. speaker. today i rise in opposition to the patients' rights act. 71 million americans have already taken advantage of this opportunity for preventive health care services. 100 million americans no longer will have a lifetime limit on their health insurance program. young adults can stay on their parents' health insurance until they're 26. 98% of the people of massachusetts are insured. the number regularly pulls in e high 70's for customer

satisfaction. let me say this, the best hospitals in the world are in massachusetts, arguably the best doctors in the world are in massachusetts, certainly the best teaching hospitals are in massachusetts. they've made it work. people are happy with the plan. if you're going to get sick, i say this to my republican friends as well, i'll get you a spot in massachusetts. here's the point we ought to be discussing today, the implementation of this successful plan. and you know i say this tongue in cheek but also with some satisfaction, we should thank governor romney for working with a democratic legislature to make sure that the model for the affordable care act was in place. let me say that again. thanks to governor romney for making sure this is successful. mr. camp: i yield one minute to the distinguished member of the ways and means comtt gentleman from indiana, mr.

young. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from indiana is recognized for one minute. mr. young: madam speaker, when obamacare was being debated, its champions and cheerleaders indicated it would create four million jobs, including 400,000 jobs almost immediately. i found it deeply disturbing then when i travel back to my district in indiana i hear from constituents, the jobs are already being lost and hours being cut in anticipation of this law's implementation. i've heard from numerous constituents who work low-wage hourly jobs like school support employees, cafeteria workers, janitors, bus drivers and so on. they're being told that due to obamacare's employer mandate they'll no longer be allowed to work more than 29 hours a week. obamacare's proponents have had a perverse incentive here. who endorses a law that the best business decision is to lay people off and during a very down economy to boot? if we're serious about addressing rising hecosts and p

back to work, we should repeal this law and repeal it now and replace with sustainable bipartisan health care solutions. thank you. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan is recognized. levin -- mr. levin: i now yield to the distinguished gentleman from the state of connecticut, mr. larson. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized one. mr. larson: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. larson: i have an idea. what if the heritage foundation had an idea to reform our entire health care system? even better, as mr. neal says, hat if that idea was piloted successfully by a republican governor in a democratic state who would go on to become their nominee for president? what if that idea were brought to fruition nationally through the affordable care act so it

could provide american citizens, especially the uninsured, and those with pre-existing conditions to become the focus of our energy and concern in washington? an emphasis on wellness, by seeking to invest in the private sector, the best in the academic sector and the public health i shall i was in that have guided our great country of ours. what if we do what the american people expect us to do instead of quivering over partisan issues, rolling up our sleeves and coming up with a solution to the american people? mr. levin: i yield an additional 30 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for an additional 30 seconds. mr. larson: coming together instead of rolling up our sleeves and putting our nation to work? every day we wasted ideological turmoil is another day lost to

the opportunity to help the american people, and the key, as mr. ryan states, to driving down our national debt. come together with us, republicans. solve this issue for america. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan is recognized. mr. camp: i yield to the distinguished gentleman from georgia, mr. graves. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia is recognized for one minute. mr. graves: mr. speaker, i rise today to say it is time to pull obamacare out root by root. we all know that it increases premiums and squeezes the family budget. we know that it does not let you keep the plan that you have today. we all know that obamacare is crushing jobs and forcing many parents who have full-time jobs today into tomorrow's part-time jobs and now we have some new information as we prepare to vote. the chief enforcers of this law, the i.r.s., have been

outed as partisan political operatives. they've harassed and bullied and suppressed the opponents of the obama administration and now they want to be in charge of our health care? give me a break. i don't think so. members, this is your chance, this is your chance to weigh in on the i.r.s. scandal. a vote to repeal is a vote to stop the i.r.s. but voting to keep obamacare is a vote to empower the i.r.s. as the health care police of the united states. the choice is easy. vote to take power away from the i.r.s. and not to give them more. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: i yield two minutes to the gentleman from texas, mr. doggett. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized for two minutes. mr. doggett: thank you. mr. speaker, i rise today in opposition to the patients' rights repeal act. like a broken record, repeating

the same old scratchy sad verse, these republicans cannot stop repeating their record of indifference to the health care crisis. they've given up on repeal and replace because all they ever cared about was the repeal part. as the party of no, this year they have not advanced a single health care proposal as an alternative. i only wish that the affordable care act was as good as they think it is bad, but to the millions who have received refunds from insurance company monopolies for overcharging, to the millions who are no longer denied coverage by the fine print and an insurance policy they didn't write to the seniors who are getting some help on their prescription drugs and preventive care, to the millions more who will be able to finally apply in

october for coverage they do not have now, for the small businesses who will receive assistance supplying their employees with the coverage they have been unable to afford in the past, you know, this obamacare, it works pretty well. together we could make it better. we can make it more accessible for more individuals, like the many people in texas who will be denied by governor perry's decision to refuse 100% of the cost of medicaid protection. together we can provide more cost-effective care and do something more about spiraling really are costs, but the only true republican alternative to obamacare is nothingcare. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from michigan is recognized. mr. camp: thank you. i yield one minute to the distinguished gentleman from michigan, dr. benishek. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan is recognized for one minute. mr. benishek: thank you.

i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. benishek: i rise to urge support of h.r. 45, legislation that will repeal the president's massive, unaffordable health care law. as a doctor, i'm extremely concerned with many different aspects of the bill, which is broad and overreaching. when this law was passed, i was in northern michigan treating patients and wondering how this bill will change the relationship between doctor and his patients. i can tell you from my 30 years of experience, after continuing to speak with doctors, nurses, hospital administrators and patients across northern michigan, there are enumerable problems with the law and it needs to be repealed. thanks to obamacare, we will face severe problems with access to quality health care. we are looking at massive cuts to reimbursements to hospitals and other care providers, cuts that will end up limiting access to care. obamacare does not fulfill the most basic promises that were used to pass this law. health care costs have not gone

down. my constituents are not able to keep their plans. these are just some of the reasons i urge all my colleagues to support this bill so we can work together to provide patient-centered reform and will reduce costs. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: i yield two minutes to another member of our que, the distinguished gentleman from new jersey, mr. cass prell. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from -- mr. levin: mr. pascrell. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized for two minutes. mr. pascrell: i rise in opposition to this bill, the patients' rights repeal act. madam chair, we've gone through this for many times. we've attempted in committee, subcommittee, to try to undercut the patients' rights to health care, and it wasn't successful. the e way, i.r.s. is not

individual agency that is the operative of health care. where in god's name did you get that from? there hasn't been much truth spoken today on the floor over there. whether in town halls or small group meetings, i asked this question when we talk about health care. i ask individuals to raise their hands if they're against, number one, you ought to raise your hands, too, closing the medicare doughnut hole for seniors. are you for that or are you against it? allowing children to stay on a family's health plan until they are 26 years of age, are you or that or are you against it? ensuring patients are not denied insurance for pre-existing conditions, are you for that or are you against that? or helping american families avoid medical bankruptcy? every meeting not one hand goes up.

how many over there, raise your hand? free country. i'll wait two seconds. maybe you didn't hear me. in new jersey, a report by the new jersey public interest research group explained by repealing health reform employers would see health costs grow by more than $3,000 a year. and most shocking, new jersey would have 10,000 fewer jobs. let's get it straight. in conclusion, let me ask my colleagues those who will vote for repeal, is the opposition willing to increase the deficit? you already used the money from the health care act to pay your budget or else it doesn't even balance in 50 years. are they willing to give the power back to the insurance companies, you got to ask that question. we come down -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. pascrell: are you willing to allow premiums to escalate? you better ask yourself that

question. the speaker pro tempore: the chair asks members to have your remarks through the chair and not to folks in the second person. the gentleman from michigan is recognized. mr. camp: i thank the chair and i yield one minute to the distinguish gentleman from florida, mr. are a del. -- mr. radel. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida is recognized. mr. radel: whether it's big government democrat programs or to be bipartisan, big partisan government programs, that brings us to this debate today on the affordable health care act which is not affordable and not about health care. it's about control. your freedom, your choices between you and your doctor no longer between you and your doctor. someone from right here in d.c. in some way, shape or form will be involved in your most personal decisions. freedom and opportunity. . your doctor in a truly free market now gone.

this repeal is about your opportunity, which obamacare is already taking away from you. i want you to have a job. i want you to work more than 39 hours a week. this repeal is about your freedom. i want you to keep more money in your pocket. i want you to have low premiums. i want you to have a choice, your choice, not washington, d.c.,. this affordable health care act is not affordable and it's now about health care, it's about control. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. once again, the chair reminds the members to address your concerns to the chair. the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: how much time is there on each side. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan has nine minutes remaining and the other gentleman from michigan has 10 1/2 minutes remaining. mr. levin: i yield two minutes to the gentleman from new york, mr. crowley. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentleman is recognized. mr. crowley: i rise in opposition to the patients' repeal act. this is the 37th vote to take health care from hard-working americans. under the republican majority, we have spent 56 hours debating repeal of the law of the land and that doesn't come close to capturing how much committee time, amendment time and debate and general grandstanding that has been spent on this bill. now, it is tempting, but i'm going to avoid illustrating this point with comparisons like telling you how much time -- how many times you can could have watched "gone with the wind" in the same amount of time. you could have watched it 15 times. what i want to talk about is what else we could have done with that 56 hours of congress' time and energy. we could have acted on a real jobs plan to get our economy

moving. we could have averted the devastating sequester cuts that are heading head start. we could have moved forward on immigration reform, gun violence prevention, but we haven't. my colleagues on the republican side of the aisle have been using a chart, an incomprehensible chart, something that no american can understand to demonstrate how the affordable care act works. it just so happens i have a chart right here. this is the republican plan to deal with the absence of the affordable care act. it's right here. this is the chart. this is the chart right here. i'll try to explain it to you. it is self-explanatory. they have no plan. they have no plan to substitute the repeal of the affordable care act. they don't have a plan for health care at all. so, my colleagues, my

colleagues, i just wish my colleagues on the other side of the aisle would spend as much time building america up as they have tried -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan is recognized. mr. camp: i yield one minute to the gentleman from ohio. mr. wenstrup: i rise in support to repeal obamacare. as a physician, i know our health care system is broken, but this form of washington meddling makes it worse. the president's law puts too much control in the hands of the a eral government creating complex system that emphasizes government intrusion over patient care. there is no reason for the i.r.s. to play a role in our health care system, favoring one and punishing another. medical decisions already cause deep anxiety in the lives of too many americans, why compound

that with the weight of an audit. our goal should be simple. respect you as a patient and connect you to the doctor that you deserve. patient-centered solutions place you, the patient at the center, simplifying your life, not pushing you to the corner of big government sprall. madam speaker, the american people deserve full repeal. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from michigan is recognized. mr. levin: i now yield two minutes to another member of our committee, the gentleman from illinois, mr. davis. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from illinois is recognized for two minutes. mr. davis: i rise today in opposition to the patient rights repeal act. and as some of my colleagues on the other side prepare to vote in favor of this legislation, i want to make sure that the american people know that they are taken.

13 million americans rebaits that they got from insurance companies last summer totalling at least $1.1 milli. they will be voting to repudiate the fact that beginning last summer, mlions of women began receiving free coverage for preventtive services. they will be voting to take away the fact that 17 million children with pre-existing conditions can no longer be denied coverage by insurers. and they will be voting to take away the coverage of 6.6 million young adults who up to age 26, are able to be on their parents' insurance coverage, half of whom without it would have no coverage at all. they will actually be voting, madam speaker, to take

americans' health care backwards. we can't afford to go there. i urge that we vote no. and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from michigan is recognized. mr. camp: at this time, i yield distinguished chairman of the health subcommittee for the purpose of controlling the balance of our time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. brady: thank you, madam speaker, i yield 1 1/2 minutes to a new member, the gentleman from florida, mr. yoho. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. yoho: i stand today to show my support for the repeal of the largest legislative piece of malpractice ever passed through the halls of congress. this one bill, the affordable patient protection care act, obamacare, has done more to disrupt our economy and bring uncertainty to the marketplace in anything i have witnessed. my colleagues on the other side talk about jobs and no job

creation on this side. we are working to create js here by repealing this bill. this is the number one job-killing bill in america and it has rocked the engine that drives our economy. the business owner and the flure that create the jobs. without jobs being created, the hard-working americans will lose their jobs and will lose their health care. instead of health care reform, congress created a health care tax and it will be a tax paid by all americans, young, old, rich or poor. today in response to the people who have had enough, the white it's, eclared this, if the, the law. not for long. madam speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from michigan is recognized. mr. levin: i yield two minutes to another distinguished member of our committee, mr. blumenauer, from the state of

oregon. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from oregon is recognized for two minutes. mr. blumenauer: thank you, madam speaker, this is as has been pointed out, the 37th attempt to repeal the health care reform. it's been my privilege to run 37 marathons in my career, but at least when you run a marathon, you get someplace. millions of people are benefiting from the health care reform, over a third of a million small businesses are getting tax credits to be able to help insure their employees. we are seeing aggressive efforts at better care, lower costs, eliminating lifetime limits, keeping young people on their parents' insurance policies. madam speaker, we are finding

across america, there are literally hundreds of thousands of people working on the implementation of this legislation. is it perfect? haven't seen a perfect bill, especially one that's dealing with 17% of our economy, but it is a dramatic improvement over what we've got, but instead of working with us to refine and improve over the course of the last four years, we go through these pointless exercises without offering an alternative. my friend, my colleague from new york, mr. crowley had their plan. a blank piece of poster board, no specifics, nothing to come forward to do a better job of meeting the needs of seniors, prescription drug problems, young people, lifetime limits,

payment reform. i'll tell you, in oregon, i have met with thousands of professionals in the health care arena who are working cooperatively on making sure that oregon is a model of how to do it right. the health care reform train has left the station. we aren't going to be repealing it today. we ought to be working to refine it in the future. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from texas. to the y: i yield 1 1/2 gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. kelly. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. kelly: it's interesting to hear as we go through this how importantjust and how great a piece of leblings this is. i have to tell you, of all the words in mouth and pen, this could have been a miraculous piece of legislation, wouldn't it have been wonderful if both

sides work and not to wait until midnight and shove it done the american people's throat and look at this and think to the future and think, i can actually plan. obamacare is making this nation sick. having a terrible effect on our economy and keep people from hiring. the worst thing is, it drives a wedge between business owners and business operators and their employeys and associates. we are trying to make those people, the owners, the managers of the business the bad guys. the bad guy in this case is the united states government. we have done something that is absolutely irreprehensible. you can't do that to people who make a living working with each other. better health care, absolutely. affordable, accessible, absolutely. this piece of legislation did not do that. and i'm intrigued by the amount of passion from the other side

when there was so little concern when it was crafted to bring the providers to the table and ask them their opinion. you talk about a piece of legislation that's not ready, we know it's law. we aren't going to keep you -- keep trying. create jobs and find out how difficult we have made it for them. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. levin: how much time on each side? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan has 3 1/2 minutes remaining and the gentleman from from texas has 3 3/4. mr. levin: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. brady: i yield two minutes to a gentleman from alabama, former district attorney who understands how communities struggle with health care, mr. brooks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. brooks: mr. speaker, i rise to proudly vote to repeal

obamacare, the most dysfunctional law to pass the united states congress. why is obamacare dysfunctional? for the vast majority of americans, obamacare guarantees worst health care at higher costs. why is it dysfunctional? obamacare imposes 21 new taxes on america, there bep by according to the congressional budget office costing 800,000 americans to lose their jobs. in my home state of alabama, just one of those tax increases imposes $200 million a year in higher tax burdens on blue cross slush blue shield, costs that will translate into higher premiums. why is obamacare dysfunctional? those 21 tax increases come no where close to paying for the increases in obamacare costs, thereby denying health care and forcing higher taxes on already stressed family income. why is obamacare dysfunctional? it gives americans worst health

care. doctors and patients will laf costly life saving health decisions. instead, independent payment advisory bureaucrats decides whether obamacare will save your life or risk ending it. why is obamacare dysfunctional? it suppresses the development and research of tools and medical cures. why is it dysfunctional. it drives up health premiums for americans who work for a living. while my friends across the aisle bebone to protect americans, i rejoice that republicans in the house of representatives say when american lives are at stake, we will never give up and will never surrender. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan? mr. levin: reserves. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas. mr. brady: i yield one minute to

a long member of this house and again, very knowledgeable in the health care and costs to families and businesses, the gentleman from georgia, mr. kingston. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia is recognized for one minute. . mr. kingston: we oversee the budget for obamacare. i can tell you the money is not there, even for implementation. the request was for $1.2 billion, and now it's accelerated to $1.7 billion and there's no funding available. and so here we are on the eve of the largest takeover of a private sector function in the united states history, and the moneys -- money's not there to implement it. what does the secretary of h.h.s. do but go to the private sector and say we need to get money from you to implement obamacare. now, that is like the mafia

shaking down businesses for protection money. i'm not saying at all that the secretary would be trying to do that purposely, but it is similar to it. how can you ask people that you regulate for money to implement a program that they're going to fall under? that is repugnant to any american. we can't let that happen. the money is not there. we need to vote no and send it back to the committee at another day. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: i now yield one minute to ms. jackson lee of texas one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from texas is recognized for one minute. madam speaker,

i rise today in opposition to the patients' right repeal act. i thank the gentleman for his time and i simply want to say thanks. my good friend, mr. crowley, indicated there's no plan on the other side. look at the list i can give you. but let me emphasize texas for the gentleman from the business community. 13 million are using the tax credit that's provided by the health insurance under the affordable care act for its workers. 17 million children with pre-existing conditions in texas no longer can be denied coverage by insurers. and then, of course, what we're finding out those who treat those with cancer are suffering because there are cuts in medicare. those cuts in medicare are coming because of my friends on the other side, but the affordable care act will provide an umbrella for those who are in need. then we find out that texas itself has 3.4 million women and over 1.8 million seniors and people with disabilities

who are benefiting from the affordable care act. but more importantly, we have articles that suggest that the poverty in texas is going up, and texas has the highest unemployed people in the nation. how can people from texas vote against this? how can they vote against this? the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. the gentlelady's time has expired. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. brady: madam speaker, i'm honored to yield one minute to the author of the legislation that we are debating today, the gentlelady from minnesota, mrs. bachmann -- minnesota. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from minnesota is recognized for one minute. mrs. bachmann: thank you, madam speaker. thank you to the gentleman from texas. this is a bill that's changing the course of american history and that's why we need to repeal this bill today. i believe, madam speaker, that we will see this bill ultimately repealed. why? because it is women who will be hurt under this bill. it is senior citizens who will be hurt under this bill. and it's little vulnerable

children who will be hurt under this bill as well as families, as well as employers. all of america is at the cusp of being negatively impacted. just one example. this bill was done out of compassion. we wanted people with pre-existing conditions to find care, but the reality is less than 1% of those with pre-existing conditions were able to receive the assistance when the door was slammed shut. why? we ran out of money. that's what obamacare has delivered, a lot of promises that can't be fulfilled. before we go forward with this train wreck, let's make sure it ends so we can bring about cures, so we can bring about better developments in health care. that's what we want. health care for american citizens and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan is recognized. mr. levin: how much time do i have? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan has 2 1/2 minutes remng and the gentleman from texas

has 2 3/4 minutes remaining. mr. levin: i yield myself the balance of the time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. levin: now, i'm from michigan. predecessor brought forth ideas at long last we would lift the shame of millions of americans who go to bed without health care. since that time, the numbers have grown. today, over 50 million. there's a reference to children. how many children today go to bed without a stitch of health care? millions. women? how many women today go to bed without any health care coverage? we provided for seniors, and we

have so far left most everybody out who needs some health care. and someone has the nerve to come forth and say there isn't when money to implement republicans won't provide that money? someone comes forth here and says there isn't the money to cover those with pre-existing conditions and republicans won't provide them money to provide further health for those people? you talk about repeal and replace. the disgrace here is you're fixed on repeal and never have come forth to satisfy the needs and the conscience of the people of this country. that's a disgrace. this bill is a disgrace.

the republican conduct on this has been disgraceful. i yield the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. brady: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. brady: what's disgraceful is this thousands of pages of bill was rushed through this ttlehase to re laden with special interest provisions to buy off votes while the promises were made to the american people that their costs would go down, they could keep their plan if they liked, the economy would boom. none of it happened, and republicans were denied even one vote on the house floor to provide a real alternative. that's the disgrace. today health care costs are going up. independent experts say it could double in some states. workers are finding out they can't keep the plan at work, that they'll be forced into an exchange.

who can afford more expensive health care? i toured a plant where the cost of obamacare is so high, it's the equivalent of building two more plants and hiring 100 workers. that won't happen. local businesses are cutting jobs and cutting hours. one restaurant owner in houston told their managers they will not hire another full-time worker, period. obamacare simply makes it too expensive. and when these concerns are voiced, what democrats in congress and the president say is it's the law, get over it, just get over it. well, the bottom line is we're fighting to repeal obamacare because it will hurt too many patients, too many people, too many families. and bad laws should be stopped early before people get hurt. year in and year out we've wrestled with this medicare formula to reimburse doctors. we've got it wrong, and doctors and seniors are being hurt.

the alternative minimum tax has been a mess for years. the deat a can you imagine homu pain we would have avoided if these bad laws had been stopped early before they hurt so many americans? make no doubt about it, we needed health reform, but the president and washington democrats got it wrong. so let's repeal it now and replace it with real reforms that help patients, that help families, that help small business. let's get government out of the office room. let's give patients real choices. let's lower health care, because obamacare, this affordable care act, has failed on all of its promises. madam speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. all time for debate has expired. pursuant to house resolution 215, the previous question is ordered on the bill, as

amended. the question is on engrossment and third reading of the bill. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. third reading. the clerk: a bill to repeal the patient protection and affordable care act and health care-related provisions and the health care and education reconciliation act of 2010. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from california seek recognition? mrs. capps: madam speaker, i have a motion to recommit at the desk. the speaker pro tempore: is the gentlewoman opposed to the bill? mrs. capps: i am. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman qualifies. the clerk will report the motion. the clerk: mrs. capps of california moves to recommit the bill, h.r. 45, to the committee on energy and commerce, ways and means and education and work force with instructions to report the same back to the house forth well with the following amendment -- forthwith with the following amendment, add the following section, provide certain protections for women and their

families as guaranteed under current a, general, section 1 shall not apply with respect to the a.c.a., women and patients benefit protection provisions described in subsection b until such date that all group health plans and health insurance issuers provide equivalent protections for women and their families as provided under all such provisions. b, a.c.a., women and families patient protection provisions, for subsection a, a.c.a., women, families shall patient protection provisions described in the subsection is as follows, it would be in effect before application of section 1. one, preventative health services coverage without sharing. sections 2413 of the public health service act, 42, u.s.c., 300-gg-13, relating to the coverage of preventative health

services without cost sharing, including well woman, preventative care visits, breast cancer screening, mammogram, screening for gestational diabetes and screening for interpersonal and domestic violence. two, coverage with for individuals with pre-existing conditions. section 1101 of the patient protection and affordable care 18001, u.s.c., relating to immediate access to insurance for uninsured individuals with a pre-existing condition. three, insuring that consumers receive value for their premium payment. 42 u.s.c., 300-gg-18, relating to the use of health insurance premiums primarily for health benefits rather than the administrative costs of insurance companies, including executive salaries and compensation.

four, no -- no lifetime or annual limit. section 2411 of the public health service act, 42 u.s.c., 300 gg-11, relating to no lifetime or annual limit. five, prohibition on pre-existing condition exclusions for children. section 2704 of the public health service act, 42 u.s.c., 300-gg-3, relating to the prohibition of pre-existing condition exclusions or other discrimination based on health status insofar as such section applies to enrollees who are under 19 years of age. six, coverage of adult children until age 26. section 2714 of the public health service act, 42 u.s.c., 300-gg-14, relating to the extension of dependent coverage for adult children until age 26.

the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from california is recognized for five minutes in support of her motion. mrs. capps: thank you, madam speaker. i rise today to offer the final and the only amendment to this bill, and i want to be clear. passage of this amendment will not prevent the passage of the underlying bill. if it's adopted, my amendment will be incorporated into the bill and the bill will be immediately voted upon. my amendment would simply ensure that women and families do not lose the benefits they have already gained from obamacare in the event that the law is repealed. these benefits are critical to keeping families healthy and identifying problems when they are easier and less costly to treat. thanks to obamacare, no longer, must women put off critical screenings like mammograms or colon screenings

and they can receive preventive care without worryying about paying for it. similarly, young adults, the most uninsured age group in our country now have the option of staying on their parents' insurance plan until they are 26. this is a real benefit that has adults 6.6 million young to keep their insurance coverage. on top of these benefits, we now have protections from some of the most abusive insurance company practices. for example, no longer can insurance companies cut off their care just because you are too expensive to treat. for too long, individuals who paid their premiums and followed the rules would still be cut off after hitting arbitrary lifetime or annual caps on coverage. these are our friends, our

neighbors, who did nothing wrong, they just got sick or had a tragic accident. and now they are protected, knowing their insurance coverage will be there when they need it. in addition, mothers no longer have to worry that their children with a pre-existing condition like autism or asthma, will be denied health care. and this january, no american will be told that they cannot get coverage due to a pre-existing condition. all of these benefits have been secured while holding insurance companies accountable to use your premium dollars on actual health care, not on bonuses or advertising. and all of these protections have been and would continue to be there for american families if my amendment passes. you truly do not realize the importance of these protections until you or someone you love needs them. and that is exactly the case of victoria strong, a young mother

living in my hometown of santa barbara, california. her daughter was diagnosed with a rare, extremely expensive disease when she was six months old. and despite the fact that she and her husband had a good insurance policy, one they paid thousands of dollars for each month, victoria lived in constant fear that their daughter would reach her lifetime limit before she even reached second grade and because of her pre-existing condition, she would be snun uninsureable for the rest of her life. i can't imagine to know that their child's health care needs would not be covered -- not to know that they would be covered or not in the future and that is what so many mothers face. but the elimination of lifetime caps on care has given victoria

from across this nation. that's what obamacare is all about. fixing our broken health care system. fixing it for families like the strong family. for women across this country, this law gets it right. we have one last vote to at least preserve the rights they already have. i believe that all americans would be better off if we in congress worked to ensure swift implementation of the law instead of wasting taxpayer dollars to repeal for the 37th time. taking away existing insurance protections from every day americans is the wrong thing to do, just because we are setting out to repeal. remember -- i remember the numerous hearings and markups about this law and there was great agreement on both sides of the aisle that these consumer protections were critical to

improving our broken health care system. no matter what you think of this bill, my amendment would guarantee no american family loses the care they have paid for when they need it the most. the law provides legal protection and peace of mind to the strong family in santa barbara, and to all the families like them across our nation. our families need this law and if the majority is willing to vote it on the 27th. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired. for what purpose does the entlelady seek time in recognition? . >> my colleagues on the other side of the aisle can try as much as they would like to distract the people from the real issue at hand. the fact remains that obamacare was bad policy when it was enacted and getting worse the closer we get to its implementation. when i hear from business owners

trying to run companies, to seniors seeking quality care options, i hear concern and bamacare is the driving force. i support full repeal of this law. mrs. walorski: let's look at a few. broken promise number one, the president claimed that he would not sign a plan that adds one dime to our deficits. the nonpartisan congressional budget office estimate that had this bill adds almost $2 trillion to the debt. after consecutive trillion dollar deficits, our national deficit is soaring to $17 trillion and it's time to stop spending money. broken promise number two, the president claimed that no family making less than $250,000 will see their taxes increase. however the joint committee on taxation obamacare

includes 21 new or higher taxes that will cost taxpayers $1.1 trillion. i recently had the chance to company. thopedic i heard stories from employees about the taxes in obamacare. i was warned in the new medical device tax will prevent the company from creating good-paying jobs for people in indiana out of work. this tax will increase the tax on medical devices used by our senior citizens and wounded war worse. the president repeatedly claims that his proposal can save families $2,500 a year when researchers from the kaiser family foundation found that the average family taxes have increased by $3,000. if not repealed, this law will increase premiums and eat away at thes of single moms

and young families all across the country. the reality is, madam speaker, this affordable care act is not so affordable. broken promise number four, the president claimed he protects medicare. instead of protecting medicare and making it stronger, he raided $716 billion from the program to fund his government takeover of our health. millions of seniors deserve better. my mom, a medicare beneficiary, deserves better. we don't need this law, period. we don't need a law that tramples over our freedoms by allowing the government to make our personal health care choices. we don't need a law that restricts our access to quality and affordable health care and i urge my law and colleagues to defeat the motion to recommit and stand today and

repeal obamacare and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back the balance of her time. without objection, the previous question is ordered on the motion to recommit. the question is on the motion. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the nos have it and the motion is not agreed to. for what purpose does the gentlelady seek recognition? mrs. capps: i ask for a recorded vote. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady asks for the yeas and nays. the yeas and nays are requested. those favoring a vote by the yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, yeas and nays are ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is -- pursuant to clause 9 of rule 20, the chair will reduce to five minutes the minimum time for any ecorded electronic vote on the

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote, the yeas are 190, the nays are 230, the motion is not adopted. the question is on passage of the bill. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. >> madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition? >> on that i ask for the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas are requested. those favoring a vote by the yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having risen, the yeas and nays are ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device.

this will be a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote, the yeas are 229 and the nays are 195. the bill is passed. without objection, a motion to reconsider is laid on the table. for what purpose does the gentleman from north carolina seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent that

i might remove my name from h.r. 107 as a co-sponsor. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. the chair announces the speaker's appointment pursuant to 22 u.s.c. 276l and thed orer of the house of january 3, 2013, of the following member on the part of the house to the british american interparliamentary group. the clerk: mr. cicilline of rhode island. the speaker pro tempore: the chair announces the speaker's appointment pursuant to 2 u.s.c. 6913 and the order of the house of january 3, 2013, of the following members on the part of the house to the congressional executive commission on the people's republic of china. the clerk: mr. wolf of virginia. mr. pittinger of north carolina.

r. meadows of north carolina. the speaker pro tempore: the chair lays before the house the following personal requests. the clerk: leaves of absence requested for mr. sam johnson of texas for today and for the balance of the week, and mrs. wagner of missouri for today and for the balance of the week.

the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the requests are granted. e need order in the house. the chair will now entertain requests for one-minute speeches. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from florida rise? without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. ms. ros-lehtinen: thank you, mr. speaker. a se today to congratulate person who thet this saturday will be joining the ranks of the selected few on the south dane high school's alumni hall of fame. throughout his life, sip as he is known, has achieved high levels of personal success and

compelled in his profession -- exceled in his profession, making him a great example of the diversity and ingenuity of the south florida community. during his senior year at south dade high, sip said, new state and -- set new state and school records for the 100-yard dash at the state championships, while crossing the finish line barefoot. as the son of migrant farm workers, similar has used his unique -- sip has used his unique perspective in working with dade county schools to create innovative educational programs and eradicate the school dropout rate among children of migrant farm workers. in 1993, after being appointed a special assistant to the secretary of the department of housing and urban development, sip became the first mexican american to receive a presidential appointment in the state of florida. sip's many accomplishments and dedication to the betterment of the community make him deserving of this great honor. congratulations to sip garza.

thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: job. for what purpose does the theleman from texas rise -- gentlewoman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, today for the 37th time, the republicans set a vote to repeal the affordable care act. mr. veasey: yet again this is a waste of time and taxpayers' resources on pure political posturing rather than working hard on behalf of hardworking american taxpayers. as a freshman member i can tell you where i stand and that is in 100% pure full support of the affordable care act. republicans have ignored real problems affecting our country and instead have chosen to attack the poor and most vulnerable. millions of americans are already enjoying protections and benefits under the law. and my state of texas, over 300,000 young adults are able to stay under their parents' plan

and over three million women and 1.8 million senior citizens have access to preventative care. many more will have insurance coverage once the insurance exchanges are in place for 2014. republicans constantly talk about requiring more efficiency and reducing redundancy in federal government. how about we start reducing redundancies right here in congress? let's move beyond these bills and into actual, substantive legislation, let's focus on jobs and grow the economy rather than wasting money on repealing the affordable care act. thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? mr. thompson: mr. speaker, request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute, revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. thompson: mr. speaker, americans want and need greater access to health care and they deserve reforms that will lower costs and expand access but without undermining quality and innovation. these were the promises of the president's health care reform law. these were worthy goals.

unfortunately they are not reality. to the contrary, over the past three years, families and businesses have seen a 400% premium increase for health care. patients are being denied coverage that physicians will not accept. employers have slowed hiring under this new cost in the fear of what's ahead. this congress has rescinded funding for or completely repealed eight separate provisions of the obamacare. key provisions of the act are beginning to collapse under the weight of their own irreparable flaws. and even my democratic colleagues have warned of the law's looming train wreck. mr. speaker, the american people deserve better. full repeal of this flawed policy is the first step to enacting commonsense reforms to actually lower costs and expand access. only then can we enact a law that truly can be called the affordable care act. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from massachusetts seek recognition? >> address the house for one minute, revise and extend my remarks.

the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. i want to talk about legislation i have re-introduced. the automatic i.r.a. act of 2013. according to boston college's retirement research, the united states has a retirement income deficit of $6.6 trillion. one area i think we need to focus on is getting more low and middle income workers into retirement savings. mr. neal: it is estimated that 75 million workers or half the american workers have no employer-provided retirement plan or other opportunity to save for workplace contributions. this auto i.r.a. is a commonsense solution to dramatically expand retirement savings in the united states. listen to this, this auto i.r.a. proposal was jointly developed by myself, along with the brookings institution and the heritage foundation. it has garnered widespread support including a.a. -- aarp, the u.s. plaque chamber of commerce, the women's institute for secure retirement and the aspen institute initialtive on financial security. this is a commonsense piece of

legislation that should be joined by both parties in advancing retirement opportunities for the american people. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia seek recognition? without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, i rise to encourage my colleagues to co-sponsor legislation i've introduced to ensure that the state of israel maintains its qualitative military edge. israel recently celebrated its 65th anniversary of independence. -- independence. unfortunately many of its neighbors attack this nation. while iran has launched cyberattacks against israel, israel is under constant danger from both convention and unconventional weapons however the current definition of quantitative military edge does not include the threats posed by militia activity or cyberattacks. mr. collins: these are very real threats against israel and must be take noon account. h.r. 1992 updates the definition

so that the asimilar ethic and cyberwarfare are concerned. i look forward to working with my colleagues on the foreign affairs committee to advance this legislation and increase our special relationship with israel. i appreciate the chairman of foreign affairs, mr. royce, for his support in co-sponsorship and i'd also like to thank my friend from across the aisle, mr. snyder, for his support. good policy knows no party line and i look forward to moving together to move this legislation forward. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from texas seek recognition? ms. jackson lee: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. ms. jackson lee: let me thank the speaker very much. i wanted a moment to reflect. this was a very sad day for me. having been here during the emotional time of the debate on the affordable care act, remembering the long hours and the deliberation and the committees and regular order,

the opportunity for republics to offer amendments -- republicans to offer amendments, and then today for the 37th time this particular act has now hurt millions of americans. my state is number one. today, mr. speaker, i want to call the role and ask those citizens of those states to call their senators. for how can you vote for such a repeal of the patients' rights act when texas, louisiana, nevada, california, florida, georgia, arkansas, alaska, mississippi and oklahoma all have uninsured, over 20%, with texas being 28.4%? it is because of poverty that drives the need to expand medicaid to. my state, to my governor, it is because of poverty that drives this. whether you are poor, whether you are low-income, whether you're working middle class, the affordable care act is to lift your boat, to give you the opportunity to have preventative

health care, to be able to have access to doctors. why would anybody vote to repeal the patient rights act? i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back the balance of her time. for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? >> i rise to the house for one minute, revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> ladies and gentlemen, let me tell you why people would vote to repeal the affordable care act. it has become very, very clear, that no matter how well intentioned it may have been, it will not work. time after time we are finding that the things that they told us just aren't handing out to be true. mr. griffith: and senator max baucus, one of the law's main architects, recently described obamacare as a huge train wreck coming down. we have a chance to save americans from being casualties of the train wreck. we can yank them off the tracks. today i voted to show that i am

trying to do just that. i call on the united states senate and the senators to join us in rescuing the american people from the tracks of health care destruction. and i yield back, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. are there any other members seeking to address the house for one minute? seeing none, under the speaker's announced policy of january 3, the gentleman from nebraska, mr. fortenberry, is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader. mr. fortenberry: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, in the past few weeks it seems as if you can't turn on the news without hearing another drama, another crisis in washington, undermining confidence in our government. whether it's benghazi, the i.r.s., the department of justice, the department and human services, it's hard to know what may be next. mr. speaker, there is an age-ol

be careful to whom you give a gun and a badge. authority is a very delicate matter. a well-functioning government must ensure that those who are in positions of influence are committed to serving the public with impartiality and fairness. recent revelations have done much to undermine the public trust. mr. speaker, eight months ago our ambassador to libya was killed, along with three other members, three other americans. not only is this an affront to america, because we lost our ambassador, it is also an attack on our nation and undermines the international rule of law. the process by which we've tried to unpack the details of this attack have been careening all over the place. even after several committee hearings on benghazi, including a foreign affairs committee hearing in which i participated

last december, a core question remains unanswered. who said stand down when reinforcements were called for? now, there may be legitimate military and diplomatic reasoning here, but we simply need to know the answer to that question. or this could have been a very serious mistake with the most grave of consequences. in the past week, we learned of discrimination against specific groups by the internal revenue service. these reports are causing a firestorm across our country. our sensitivities are rightly heightened when it comes to the collection of taxes. no one wants to pay taxes, but we must have a revenue-collecting agency in order to have a functioning federal government. it is unconscionable, though, that this agency targeted citizens because of their political or religious beliefs. the i.r.s. of all agencies must

be held to the highest of high standards of fairness and impartiality. the reported action seriously undermine the foundation of trust necessary between citizens and their government. that's why this week the taxpayer nondiscrimination and protection act was introduced with my support. the legislation puts meaningful penalties in place when this foundation of trust is violated. penalties that include -- could include prison time. perhaps it's also time for the i.r.s. to implement a new policy. everyone they are auditing or perhaps have audited in the past three years must be provided with a fuller explanation as to why they're going through this process, to ensure that there is no improper targeting of persons of american citizens, based upon their religious or political beliefs. just this morning a friend of mine texted me, another called me just yesterday worried that the audit that was undertaken

against them was due to their own political leanings and engagement. but, mr. speaker, the real issue is this. just how deep and wide is the mindset that pervaded the i.r.s. that did target americans based upon their religious or political leanings? on another issue, we are learning that the department of justice seized phone records much associated press reporters, including their personal phone lines. now, the ability to wiretap and probe needs to be in place in narrow circumstances. but the wide-ranging nature of what happened raises a number of questions. these questions beg us to ask, how do we protect the freedom they have press. another fact is that the department of health and human services is also targeting people based on their beliefs.

they are forces them to pay for medicines and treatments that are deeply againster that religious beliefs. when the president introduced his health care plan, he told americans if they liked their health insurance they could keep it. now we're finding out, you can't keep your doctor, you cannot keep your own health care plan you may not even be able to keep your own faith tradition. this is a form of coercion and is not american. all of these events are converging to erode confidence in washington. now thankfully, many of these concerns actually cross the political aisle. there is bipartisan concern. these are american issues. and these events underscore why we do have a balance of power in washington. there is an executive branch that enforces the law and there is a legislative branch that writes the law. the legislative branch also has the duty to provide oversight

over the executive branch which is a duty that congress now is rightly embracing. mr. speaker, it is important that in each instance here, the truth is uncovered and swift and appropriate actions are taken to help restore confidence in the impartiality, fairness, and competence of the federal government. with that, mr. speaker, i yield back. 13r0eu7 the gentleman yields back. -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. under the speaker's announced policy of january 3, 013, the gentleman from new jersey, mr. smith, is recognized for 55 minutes as the designee of the majority leader. mr. smith: i thank the speaker for yielding. with the recren murder conviction of abortion dr. kermit gosnell, we've got to

encourage americans to ask, how different really is gosnell's house of horrors from abortions that occur in clinics throughout the yeats. -- across the united states? the tragic answer, not much. not much at all. there are kermit gosnells across the country, predators, child abusers, some abortionist mace gosnellaner sheets than did, better sterilized equipment and better trained accomplices but what they do and what gosnell did for four decades, kill babies and hurt women, is the same. will americans ever be told the horrifying details as to how an how often abortionists dismember, decapitate, and chemically poison innocent babies? where is the outrage, mr. speaker over the 55 million

child victims who have been brutally killed by abortions over the last 40 years? and the millions of women who have been hurt physically, emotionally and psychologically, and why the appalling lack of compassion? why the empathy deficit for the victims, women and children, by so many, including and especially president obama and vice president biden? women an children, mr. speaker, deserve better. and of course gosnell's trial isn't the first to rip the benign facade of legitimacy from the abortion industry. as far back as 1975, dr. kenneth edwin was convicted by a jury in boston of murdering an african-american baby boy found dead and abandoned in the boston city hospital morgue. an investigation that led to trial revealed that the child

was yet another kenneth edlin victim. when the jury saw the picture of the dead baby, they were apalled and persuaded that indeed a homicide had occurred. astonishingly, that conviction was subsequently overturned by the massachusetts supreme court which simply dismissed the murder as yet another legal abortion. mr. speaker, how did planned parenthood react to the reversal of verdict? with euphoric celebration. dr. edlin after all was their guy. years later, he became the chairman of the board of planned parenthood federation of america and was even fwiven the margaret i wouldward in 2008 and note parenthetically, i would note in 2009, they gave the sanger award to hillary clinton. and like gosnell, not a single

tear was shed by dr. kenneth edlin or plavened parenthood for the murdered child victim. last week, an undercover investigation live action released more undercover videos that exposed the abortion industry absolutely appalling and callous disregard for human life, human rights, and federal law. priestly, live action aired several videos showing planned parenthood abortion clin expersonnel advising women at several clinics throughout the country, including in my own home state of new jersey, as to how to procure sex selection abortions simply because the unborn child happened to be a little girl. and other equally disturbing videos showing planned parenthood staffers who coan offered to arrange

secret abortions for teenage sex trafficking victims. one of those was in a planned parenthood where i went to high school. and a young latina, very young, 4, 15, posing as a woman who had been trafficed with a man that was posing as a pimp, talked -- and i advise people to watch those videos, go to live action, gooling it, you can find it. watch how they say we cannot only abort this young girl who had been trafficked, and i wrote, mr. speaker, the trafficking victims protection act to combat modern day slavery in 2000, this hideous modern day exploit eags mostly of women and children. and there's planned parenthood personnel saying how this young girl could get a secret abortion, be back out on the streets and of course further

exploited by this person purported to be a pimp. the first call should have been to the police to have them arrested. instead they talked about how to get the secret abortion. live action has released undercover video showing a bronx, new york, abortion counselor describing how, in violation of u.s. federal law, a a born-alive baby would be placed in a jar of toxic solution to ensure his or her death. a d.c. abortionist is also captured on film who talks about leaving a baby born alive after a botched abortion simply to die due to the elements. an arizona worker said that they would not resuscitate should a by by survive an abortion attempt. this is not just violence against children, this is against -- this is a violation of federal law. live action president lila rose released yet another must-see

video of a maryland abortionist by the name of dr. leroy carhart who compares a baby in the womb, u've got to watch this, to meat in a slow cooker. meat in a slow cooker. and jokes about his abortion tool kit complete with pick ax and drill bits. i watched that and i was sick. this man's so-called legal abortions right within range of this nation's capitol. someday, and i believe the day is fast approaching, americans will look back and wonder how and why such a seemingly enlightened society, so blessed and endowed with education, advanced science, information, wealth, opportunity, could have so utterly failed to protect th.

they will wonder how and why a noble peace prize winning president could also have simultaneously been the abortion president. and planned parenthood's best friend. despite the fact that -- the tragic fact, that planned parenthood is directly responsible for aborting other six million babies in their clinics. history will not look favorably on today's abortion culture. we must instead work tirelessly to replace it with a culture of life. women and children deserve no less. i yield back the balance of my ime. >> under the speaker's announced policy of january 3, 2013, the gentleman fromical -- from colorado, mr. polis, is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader.

mr. polis: thank you, mr. speaker. today i'm proud to rise in strong support of comprehensive immigration reform. there are many of my colleague that was fought these battles long before i arrived in congress. but today i join my colleagues, democrats and republicans, in strong support of comprehensive immigration reform. comprehensive immigration reform is the single most important thing we can do to grow our economy. it will also help make sure that our laws reflect our values as americans. we are, after all, a neigh of laws and a nation of immigrants. and the two can and must be made consistent through comprehensive immigration reform. i want to acknowledge the work of many of my colleagues both in the senate and house in working toward this worthy goal. i said in my district and here on the floor of congress that ve limited time here

have i ever been more optimistic about getting immigration reform done than i am now. immigration reform is long overdue and should this congress fail to rise to the challenge, mr. speaker, the issue will not go away. the issue will not go away. there may be 10 or 11 million people here without papers to be able to work and that doesn't solve itself. so let's take this on. let's take this on on behalf of the american people, on behalf of americans of all ideologies, arm in arm with faith-based groups, with civil rights groups work law enforcement, with the business community. all of whom have come to washington and met with members back home, imploring on us the urgent need for action. there are strong economiarcment

reform spurs innovation, creates jobs, makes sure employers play by the same rules and doesn't benefit some employers by dealing under the table in an illegal way as happens today. i have spoken out about some of the steps that states and congress have taken in the absence of congress -- of comprehensive immigration reform because those measures simply don't work. et's take programs like secure communities, these draconian laws have actually made our communities less safe by making our immigrant communities less leekly to report crime. failure to access health care make ours community less safe by deteriorating public health. a recent poll showed that almost 30% of u.s.-born latinos, american, are scared to report a crime even if they are a victim, out of fearration

status or the status ofer that family and friends. in order to begin to address this important public safety issue, we have to pass comprehensive immigration reform and restore trust to community policing across the country. there is a political imperative facing the united states congress because a vast majority of americans wan to see us pass comprehensive immigration reform, over 70%, majority of conservatives, self-described, of moderates, of liberals of democrats, of republicans, of independents, 83% of americans support a pathway to citizenship for these who pass a background check and want to learn english and play by the rules. i've heard my colleagues say, why don't they get in line? well the truth of the mat every is, mr. speaker, there is no line. imfwrigsgegs -- immigration reform is about creating a line.

of course those here illegally will be in line behind those who are here legally but we need to create a line. have an orderly way of doing what is under the table and done extralegally today. the american public wants us to act now and continues to demand that of this congress because the american people are wise and they know that nothing will help us grow the economy more, will shore up the budget deficit and the entitlement programs that we worry about, will re-establish the rule of law, will help us secure our borders, facilitate trade, nothing will to that better than bipartisan comprehensive immigration reform. the markup is under way. as we move forward, we'll be talking out for and against various amendments that support or undermine our principles. i think what's critical is to

protect the pathway to citizenship for those who are living in the shadooths and we need to make a realistic way. no version of immigration reform confers citizenship on anyone. this is about creating a line in the process by which people have provisional status, maybe someday a green card and maybe someday if they want to learn english and take the citizenship est and forego their a-- foreign allegiances. if they want to return to another country, that is fine, too. this country has been built by immigrants from across the world. my own great-grandparents came to these shores and i have the deep honor today of serving in the united states congress. we need to make sure that immigration reform keeps

families together and strengthens our family-based visa program and realistic wait time that are consistent with peoples' lives so parents can be with their kids as they grow up. nothing can be more inhumane than the way immigration laws play out today in our country where an american child, an american citizen, returning home from school, might find that their mother or father is in an indefinite detention process, indefinite detention process, not because of anything their kid did. why? maybe they had a taillight out or going 10 miles over the speed limit. is that a moral justification for tearing up a strong family unit, mr. speaker? i met with many of these kids. i have met with their parents. we need to be a congress that supports families and helps

parents to spend time with their kids and make sure no kid has to worry about their parent who has no criminal violation. only talking about civil violations. no criminal violation, suddenly missing for months or sent to a country that the child may not have even been to. there's a number of reasons in addition to the moral ones for immigration reform. many of our fast-growing companies cry out for a skilled work force. for america to be competitive or innovative companies in the technology industry to be successful for know vale -- innovative companies. we need to compete in the global talent pool. americans companies are precluded from doing that today and we wonder jobs are being outsourced, why are companies growing in india and england, why are they growing overseas in

chile. many of those companies would rather grow here and our current laws prohibit them from doing so because they can't get the people they want. i represent a district that have two fine universities, colorado state university and for the collins university. educating chools are the next engineers, computer programmers, scientists, some of whom are foreign nationals legally here on student visas. but once they are trained, once that young man from india, that young woman from france gets the advanced degree in computer science and master's degree, guess what our government says? our government says, guess what, you have to leave. you have to take that job to france. you have to take that job to india. you have to take that job to

canada. our government is saying we don't want that job in our country. this congress can make a statement that we do want that job here in america. we want to grow our economy stronger. we want to make sure that people that have had the great benefit of learning at one of our higher institutions can deploy their talents to make our economy stronger. that is what comprehensive reform is all about. i'm optimistic that the comprehensive immigration reform will provide a new mechanism for interviewers to start their companies here. there is no visa classification for someone who has an idea, venture capital investment. wants to hire 10 people, 2 people and it's not about the people they hire but for the potential of that company to employ thousands of people down

the road. again, what does our government say? , go start that company in chile or china or india. i'm sure those companies need companies, too. but as a congressman represent america and i want that company here, mr. speaker. i want it in my congressional district and in my state but i'll be happy as long as it's in america. let's provide a way through a startup visa that an entrepreneur who has a great idea and receiving a real investment can start their company here in our country. hire americans, grow that company, create jobs, live the american dream. that's what this country is all about. that's what this country is all about. let's talk about the dreamers, mr. speaker. these are young defacto

americans. why defacto americans? maybe they were brought here when they were 2, 5 or 1. they didn't violate any law. what do they know about the law? they grew up here. they were cheerleaders. they got good grades. they're going to college. guess what? they don't have any type of identification that allows them to work in this country and technically under the law, they would have to return to another country where they may not speak the language or even knew anybody. while president obama's deferred action program is a strong step in the right direction and least many of these dreamers no longer live in fear of indefinite detention and can go to work, that's only a two-year timeout. only congress can provide a permanent status for these millions of defacto americans

who know no other country and are as american as you and me, american, in fact. let's make them american in law. and that, too, should and must be a part of the comprehensive immigration reform package. our country is about family values and letting parents raise their kids without fear of the government intervention. being able to live the american dream. these are values that transcend our ideologies. these are values that conservative americans and liberal americans and moderate americans can all agree on. and when i have town hall meetings in my district and we always as you can imagine, mr. speaker, attract a broad ideology call diversity, everybody from the far right and

the far left of people in the middle. is anybody here happy, i ask, with immigration. does anybody think we are doing a great job? not any single constituent said yes, we have to keep doing what we are doing. it ain't working. countries are violating the law everybody. taxpayers are on the hook. let's change it. it ain't going to change unless we change it. doesn't change itself. states have tried to move forward with what they can. some states have looked into issuing state worker permits or make sure that people have driver's insurance. but look, they are cleaning up after our mess. that's all the states can do. we need to fix this mess here in washington. only united states congress has the authority to restore credibility and integrity to our

immigration law. americans of all stripes are joining the call for comprehensive immigration reform now. strengthening our border security and facilitating legitimate trade and commerce across the border. employer enforcement. making sure that employers aren't left off the hook for hiring people who don't have the right to be here. making sure we have the workers we need to fuel our economy. all kinds of jobs that we need. we talked p about technology and programmers. guess what? we also need people in the fields picking tomatoes and harvesting oranges. need people who clean buildings at night. we're happy, we're always happy -- i always meet with a farmer

in laramee county and he said he would love to hire an american. he never had an american that would keep that job. he relies on immigrant labor and wants us to pass immigration reform that includes a way to have seasonal workers to meet the needs that they have in the field. i'm joined by one of my colleagues from the great state ta alifornia, congressman cano has shown a strong commitment to make sure that immigration reform passes. i'm proud toll welcome mr. ta cano and yield to the gentleman from california. mr. takano: i thank the gentleman from california

yielding time. even though the economy is improving and job creation levels are the highest they have been in four years, the top priority for all members of congress must be putting people back to work and strengthening the economy. despite what opponents of immigration reform say, the bill proposed in the senate does just that, and moreover, it strengthens social security. one of the republican architects of the senate bill, senator rubio sent a letter to the social security administration's chief actuary asking for the net effect of comprehensive immigration reform on the social security trust fund. in his reply, the chief actuary stated that they are developing 75-year estimates, but quote, and this is actuary goss sfeg,

overall we anticipate that the net effect of this bill, meaning immigration reform on the long balance. ue article and it states over the next 10 years, comprehensive immigration reform will prevent two million illegal border crossings and create 3.2 million jobs and increase our gross domestic product by a third. opponents don't understand that many of the undocumented immigrants in this nation are already working. yet because of their legal status, they are forced into the underground economy with no labor protections and no way to pay into the system. put plainly, undocumented immigrants are often paid cash under the table and often

drastically less than the minimum wage. allowing these individuals to come out of the shadows and put them on the pathway into the system and receive basic protections against abuse. for example, an undocumented worker may only be working for $5 instead of $8. if comprehensive immigration reform is passed he or she will be eligible for the minimum wage, which will increase his buying power and drive up wages for everyone else, thus increasing our annual g.d.p. growth rate as shown here on this chart. just to be clear, without comprehensive immigration reform, our annual growth rate 4.5%. nly be

but with comprehensive immigration reform, our annual rowth rate shoots up to 6.1%. if the priority of this body is putting americans back to work and strengthening our economy, then it must pass comprehensive immigration reform that creates a pathway to citizenship and allow tissue allows undocumented workers the ability to work under the same labor protections and pay into the same system as everyone else. thank you and i yield back to the gentleman from colorado. mr. polis: i thank the gentleman from california for sharing that information. what better way can we grow our economy, create jobs for americans, reduce our national debt, redeuce the deficit, if we can simply accomplish

comprehensive immigration reform. many colleagues on both sides of the aisle have questioned how we can make sure social security is viable and there, making sure eour younger imgrants are paying in will help make sure that occurs and that today's seniors and tomorrow's seniors will be taken care of in their old age. i think that comprehensive immigration reform is absolutely critical toward job growth and creation. the gentleman talked about the difference between a 6.1% and 4.5% growth, that represents millions of jobs, millions of jobs for americans. that's what's at stake with this discussion. that's what's at stake with this discussion. i want to -- the gentleman -- i want to ask the gentleman from california to talk about how important jobs -- jobs are in his district and how you'd benefit from that additional 2% growth, what would that mean to folks in riverside, folks in california? increaseo: a 2% growth could reduce our current 11%

unemployment in my district in riverside county. which we n the empire call the region i represent in california, we often lag behind the rest of the state when we are coming out of economic downturns. what i find most interesting about chief actuary goss' statement, his reply to senator rubio's question was, how comprehensive immigration reform will have a positive net effect on social security and if you think about that carefully, compare our nation to, say, a nation such as japan, where there is no inflow of immigration and where the population is aging, or other advanced nations where there is no significant amount of immigration and the pop leags is

aging, they are facing tremendous stresses on the way in which ty e oning to provide for their senior citizens. it only makes sense that to keep social security solvent, we want young, vibrant, inflows of capable workers to pay the taxes that will support social security in the future. mr. polis: i know the gentleman from california has also been a lead for the opposing the chain c.p.i. adjustment to social security. don't you think that this immigration reform concept is a better way to shore up social security rather than trying to change the formula to change c.p.i.? -- to chain c.p.i.? >> i think -- i agree, i think that's a good question. chain c.p.i. as you know -- well, many americans may not know what chain c.p.i. means. c.p.i. is the consumer price indegrees, the way in which the

increase in social security benefits are calculated. there are some economists who propose something called chained c.p.i., which assumes that seniors could withstand a slight reduction in their benefits because they could substitute other goods and services that are cheaper but main fwoods and serviceat senior citizens consume is health care and medicines and prescription drugs. those goods and services they can count on increasing faster than the rate of inflation. let's look at how this immigration bill is going to work. for the first 10 years, registered provisional status for the immigrants who have been undocumented, would mean that people would be legal in this country, on legal status.

they would be paying tacks but but -- but could not be drawing any social security benefits out. i personally have some problems with this but under this current law, for 10 years, we would see llions of workers who are under the social security cap who will be paying into the social security trust fund but none of them would be able to draw anything out for at least 10 years. you just do the simple back of the envelope math and you'd have to understand what an inflow of revenue that would be for the system. >> and you knowing comprehensive immigration reform helps two ways, trst more people paying in, and more economic growth, meaning social security is funded through a payroll tax, so when you have more people working, lower unemployment, we talked about getting the rate in riverside down from 11% to 9%, to 8%, to 6%. everybody working is then paying in and that also makes social security stronger.

the argument about the critical economic growth engine that we need not only creates jobs today but helps ensure that tomorrow's seniors are taken care of in their old age. >> yeah, it's a double benefit. many people may not have been aware of a double positive effect on our economy. it's counterintuitive thi to that, for many people it's unte by reforming immra and by giving legal status to undocumented immigrants, allowing them to come out of the shadows and to be protected by our labor laws, that that would have a net positive effect on all wages, but it would. these people are already working. and they're working currently, many of them, at subminimum wage levels. if we bring them up to minimum wage, it will mean an even

playing field for all workers. there's a kind of rising tide effect that lists -- that lifts all boats. mr. polis: that's a good point. i, like yourself, hear from workers, american workers who say i'm frustrated because there are people here illegally working for less than minimum ger working for cash. what i say to those american workers is, i say that's exactly why we need comprehensive immigration reform. we need to make sure that people aren't allowed to compete under the table for cash. we're actually creating, by the failure of our own laws, an entire underground labor economy and by the way, those workers aren't protected from abuse bier that employees -- employers, sometimes they do the work and they're not paid and they can't sue. i have some exciting news to announce this just broke on cnn, the bipartisan house group has reached an agreement on immigration reform. announced by republican representative mario diaz-balart.

so i know the group has been working for some time, many of us have encouraged them and supported their work. we certainly hope to see the bill soon. as the senate continues the markup, hopefully this is a great ategsal dose of enthusiasm for us, it looks like here in the house our efforts will hopefully be moving forward as well on a bipartisan basis. >> i associate myself with -- mr. takano: i associate myself with the gentleman's comments. i will temper my enthusiasm until i actually see the elements of the compromise but , i think folks here there's great hope on both sides of the aisle that comprehensive immigration reform, if we can pass comprehensive immigration reform, it will be ed, the first evidence in a long time that this body is functional and could work and that our

government can do great things. so i'm -- i am cautiously optimistic and thank you for sharing that information. mr. polis: i thank the gentleman from california for his leadership on this issue. i agree that for congress to ever be a trusted institution, it needs to solve problems. it needs to come up with practical, commonsense solutions and it's clear what that route is for immigration. it's not too different than what president bush talked about. that president obama supports. as long as -- it's a comprehensive approach. not just this -- not this piecemeal approach some talk about, let's build a wall and then talk about something else, let's do something in high tech and then talk about something else. look, those are band-aids and the patient is bleegged. mr. takano: i agree. we need a holistic approach. people have, i was very

impressed at affect coy and chamber of commerce were able to come together and sign off on what senators, the group of eight in the senate, had devised. my goodness, if the chamber of commerce and the afl-cio can come together, certainly republicans and democrats in this institution can come together as well. mr. polis: and like yourself, i, obviously, refrain from making particular comments about the house package until i see it but i'm confident that with bipartisan support like the senate bill has, hopefully this house package will address a lot of these issues that you and i have discussed today, making families stronger, restoring the rule of law, reducing crime, creating economic growth, improving social security, hopefully those benefits are included in this package which i am very excited to examine and look at in the days and weeks ahead and hopefully we can join

our colleagues on the other side of the capitol in dealing with this critical issue. again, over 84% of the american people support a pathway to citizenship. 84%. you can't get 84% of the american people to agree on anything and yet on this pathway citizenship and immigration reform, you have 84% support. i hope that congress heeds that call. i know the gentleman from california, mr. takano is a leader in getting our colleagues to hear that call and he is joaned by many of our friends and it will take all of us working hard to ensure that congress his up to the expectations that the american people are setting and takes the right course on this for our country and for economic growth. i yield to the gentleman. mr. takano: thank you for this time to share our vision for moving forward with the american people. i wake up each day excited to come to work and work on their

despite our division, despite the rancor we see sometimes on various cable shows, it's an enormous honor to serve in this institution and it's a great honor to serve in this institution with the gentleman. i must bid adieu, i have to get going. but thank you so much. mr. polis: i thank the gentleman from california for highlighting the argument of economic growth in the immigration reform. mr. speaker, i'd like to inquire how much time remanes. the speaker pro tempore: 27 minutes. mr. polis: thank you. we have a unique opportunity here in the united states congress to reflect the will of the american people. the woifl the american people is clear in this regard. in my time here, seldom if ever have i seen an issue where 8 %, 75%, 84% of the american people the faithhere we are, community, the civil liberties

commun, the education community, the business community, the labor community, all coming together to say, congress, do something. and by the way, congress not do something like create some new program or do some new policy, it's congress, fix this. only you can do it, congress. states can't do it. states don't have control over this. some nonprofit or private organization can't do it. only, only the federal government and only the united states congress can replace our broken immigration system with one that works for our country. one that reflects our country's need for human capital, for talent, for ideas, for innovation. one that helps make sure that we attract the best and brightest and hardest working people from across the world to deploy their talent here's, to make hour country stronger in a legal way. one that restores the trust with law enforcement and prove --

improves public safety in our communities, allows community policing and police officerses to win the trust that is so critical, for them to fight crime that affects all of our communities. mr. speaker, i also rise today to talk about a commonsense issue that's received a lot of discussion in the press and continues to be on many of our minds, and that's how we can reduce violent crime in this country, gun violence, senseless murder, and deaths that occur. now this is no easy question. my focus here has always been improving education. i crewly believe that improving our schools and making sure that kids have access to the great opportunity that this country offers is the best way that we can reduce crime. but we can do more, mr. speaker. we can do more in a commonsense way to make it harder for criminals to acquire weapons.

now how can we do this? many states have led the way. my home state of colorado has long had a rule that has closed the gun show loophole and made sure that people who buy guns at gun shows have the same type of background check they would at a gun dealer. i think that's a commonsense rule we should do nationally. i think we also need a national way to make sure when somebody buys a gun, that there's a background check. in doing so we need to make sure that there's no national registry of gun owners, we need to protect gun owners' privacy, we want to make sure it doesn't inconvenience law-abiding americans who want to be able to buy guns at dealers and have guns and will continue to do so but this is easy to accomplish. the senate discussed such a bill, i understand there's several proposals as well in this body. and i've seen data, this has broad support from the american people. and it should be a commonsense idea for any of us. there are people in this country

who have lost the right to bear arms because they've committed a crime, armed robbery or rape, and as part of a judicial sentence they have lost that right and they have lost the right to vote as well. now you're not going to stop them from getting a knife or a gun or no law will stop them from doing that, but we should make it harder. we should make it so they can be the just go to a gun show and buy gun for cash. there should be a background check. to make sure that the person buying the gun is a law-abiding american and has the right to do that. and i think it's a common -step measure and i call my colleagues to take up and pass to help reduce violence in this country. mr. speaker, i also want to talk about the urgent need to improve our schools.

across our country, we have schools that many parents would be proud to send their kids to. we have schools that continue to fail year after year, that anybody who has the means to have choice, meaning they are able to afford to drive their kids somewhere else or pay private tuition. the families that are forced to go to that school have no alternatives. it is incumbent upon our states and federal government and we und public education to ensure those schools don't continue to operate the way they have been. i introduced the school turnaround bill. this will address the lowest 5% of schools. we are talking about high schools that are dropout factories, where half the kids that go in the front door in

ninth grade don't graduate in 12th grade. what options do you have in life to support your life and family if you don't have a degree? it is getting harder and harder. we need to turn around the schools and empower the superintendents of the school districts to use the creativity to turn the schools around and they need to take action. as i told one of our superintendents, our goal should be to give you the superintendent, the flks built for you to be able to do what works, but not the flexibility to do nothing, because we know that in doing nothing, we will fail to change models that fail. and whether the model that works is turning it into a charter school or closing it down and opening three new schools in the same building, there are a lot dent canho depending upon the

community needs, which are important to make any education reform work. but it's critical that they take action. because without taking action, they are guaranteed more of the same. mr. speaker, i call upon my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support comprehensive immigration reform today. in my time on the floor in the last hour and could continue for even longer, to articulate all of the reasons why comprehensive immigration reform benefits our country, whether one cares about the safety of our communities from crime, whether one cares about the public health, restoring the rule of law, securing our borders, growing our economy, high-skill jobs, making sure our farmers can thrive and grow and our families

can stay together and grow up in family homes, for all of these reasons and more, i call upon my colleagues to support comprehensive immigration reform. i thank the speaker for the time. and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: under the speaker's announced policy of january 3, 2013, the chair recognizes the gentleman from ndiana for 30 minutes. >> i thank the speaker. i want to start out this evening by saying it's been a busy day here in the capitol and it's been a busy week. some of it good, a lot of it, not so good, but it caused me to come to the floor tonight to talk with my colleagues, talk

with the speaker about some of the things that really are our core values, not as republicans americans. , but as mr. rokita: all of us, all americans, believe in diversity. and we are here as a congress nd in so many respects, to celebrate that diversity. a great free republic like this is going to have difficult veering ent views and opinions and diversity in everything we do in everything we say, everything we are, and that's ok. we are open to all races, agendaers and other classifications. we are a family. we are one big national family. and like any other family, we

are going to have our struggles. we are going to have our disagreements. mr. speaker, i'm here to remind us all tonight that that's ok. that's what it means to be in a free republic, because the alternative is much, much worse. you see the alternative is not being able to have diversity at all. not being able to have an opinion different than the commanders at all. not being able to have free speech or free association. mr. speaker, like any family, we face issues that make it difficult, especially seemingly these days to find consensus. we need to have open and honest dialogue, preferably without yelling or judging each other. just like any other family, the neighbors down the street, so to speak, are going to beging

us, be watching us. and we don't have to worry so much about them. just to make sure that we continue having our discussion in a respectful way. and like i said, although we have severe disagreements over some issues, there are four things that we all should be about regardless of our diversity otherwise. and i want to go through some of those tonight. r example, we believe in the power of the individual, not the power of government over the individual. this isn't a republican theme. although i am a republican. this is a constitutional theme. this is what our founders fought for and wrote for in those two great documents that we call the declaration of independence and the united states constitution. we believe as americans that

people are capable of making their own decisions about health care. much better than government can. and mr. speaker, we saw a great debate on the floor of this very house. and it's because individuals, families, people can make decisions for themselves regardless of whatever it is, better than the government can, that i oppose this affordable health care act, that we oppose obamacare. we believe that freedom is more when government is less. this is called the power of individualism over collect i havism and it's quee what this country has been successful over 200 years. and better illustrate what i'm talking about, when you realize what happens when freedom is

absent. i want you to take a look at this view from space. this is the korean peninsula. and here's the dividing line twn -- between north and south korea. it is taken at night and what you are seeing is an tule representation of the lights in both countries. lights generated from electricity by power plants. ights are on in south korea, commerce, show vitality and economic freedom show individual freedom. but look to north korea. almost complete darkness. only one group of lights right around here, the capital city of north korea where all the elites live, more specifically, where all the government officials

live and more specifically than that, where all the government officials in a closed tier ran call society live. freedom is more when government is less, when government is limited. and we believe that the best way to ensure that government remains limited is to stop feeding it so much. and around here, the government's food, what it lives on, what it grows on day by day, is money. what it grows on is our tax dollars. and more and more these days, it's also growing on the taxes of individuals who don't even exist yet, mr. speaker, the children of tomorrow. yes, they are being taxed here today. it's called our nearly $17 trillion worth of debt. and it's also represented by the

$100 trillion of debt that's on its way. will get to that in a minute. mr. speaker, we believe that money is the fruit of our labor. we believe that money is our that the the same way land and homes that some of us may own are our property, the same way that a bicycle that we ride might be our property. so is our money. and we believe that when government taxes us, they confiscate our property. and that that property is the fruit of our labor. we can't forget that. i remember recently being in my district specifically in the city of lafayette, home of

purdue university, and i was struck at a rotary club meeting to describe what our government does and got a good degree of pushback, annoyed withthe word that i used, confiscation of our property when clearly our government needs our money in order to function. that's true. government absolutely is a valid role in a free society, as long as it remains in a limited form. and more and more, mr. speaker, what i see being debated here on this house floor and what i see enacted, some new law, is government being involved in things that the constitution and the people and the free society do not require, in fact, should

not have the government be doing. we believe that individuals, families, communities are always better at making decisions for ourselves than government is. today, some believe that just having more power over their lives, they could have control and it would be better. for example, they have the right to tell you what kind of light bulbs to buy. they believe you should only be able to buy cars with certain my age standards. they believe they have the light dictate what is in your child's lunch box and they have the right to make sure your child learns certain things and make certain that they don't learn other things. they believe that they can make better health care decisions for you than they can. they believe through the e.p.a.

that they can tell you how much electricity to use. and under the guise of making things cleaner, they are simply controlling your lives. we believe the opposite. the founders knew exactly that the opposite was true, that decisions are best made by individuals and communities at the local level. we believe that government is the servant of the people and that people aren't the servants of government. . . we are trying to hold the executive branch accountable for a coverup in benghazi. this is not only about lives being lost but about a breach of trust. president obama lied about the cause, islamic terrorism, then they tried to cover their tracks. and now they say that those of us demanding the truth are the

ones politicizing the situation. the executive branch owes the people the truth. it's basic accountability. they are our servants. we are not theirs. we also believe in the right of a free press. unfortunately, right now, we have a department of justice that tries to spy on and intimidate members of the press. we find out in recent days that through subpoenas, government action, individual reporters' names, their cell phones and their phone records have been compromised. have been taken by the federal government. it's my opinion that this administration is simply afraid of being held accountable, whether it's by a free press or by this congress. the founders knew that both a free press and congress with oversight are necessary to prevent tyranny. that's why our job is so important. that's why americans are expecting d counting on us to

take the benghazi investigation, to take the a.p., associated press, investigation, as far as it gos until we find out what the truth is perhaps our fundamental right is the one of free speech. the one that is absolutely necessary in a free society. it's the one that's core and fundamental in our bill of rights. but today, mr. speaker, we have an i.r.s. that is targeting groups of private citizens simply because of their political beliefs. violating their right of free speech and violating their right of free association. this is nothing more than an abuse of power. it violates the constitution's guarantee of equal protection under the law and should frighten each one of us regardless of political party. i guarantee you this, mr. speaker. this american along with many others in this congress are going to go as far as we need to

go with investigation in order to find the full truth. the government must remain a servant of the people, not the other way around. mr. speaker, we believe in giving a hand up, not necessarily a handout. because we believe that hand up is what made america strong while a handout is what basically caused other nations in history to fail. resulting ultimately in tyranny. a government can't be all things to all people. it can't do everything for everybody. it's been tried before. this is not a new idea, mr. speaker. but every time it's been tried in our history, it's resulted in terrible tyranny or ultimate failure altogether. let me give you an example, mr. speaker. approximately 48 million americans are on food stamps. more than at any other point in our history. now, i know we've been going through some tough times.

but that's not because too few people are getting food stamps. the government is handing out free cell phones. but welfare programs are supposed to be for the poorest of the poor, for those who need that hand up. we shouldn't be giving handouts. unfortunately, mr. speaker, we are. look at the facts. under the census bureau's definition of poor, quote-unquote, 80% of poor households have air-conditioning. in 1970, only 36% of the entire u.s. population enjoyed air-conditioning. 92% of poor households have a microwave. nearly 3/4 have a car or truck and 1% have two or more cars or trucks. nearly 2/3 have cable or sat ride tv.

-- or satellite tv. 2/3 have a d.v.d. player and 70% have a v.c.r. these are all poor households, households that would qualify for food stamps and other welfare programs. half of them have a personal computer and one in seven have two or more computers. 43% have internet access. one third have a wide screen plasma or l.c.d. tv. mr. speaker, we are a giving nation. we want to help out. our volunteers -- our volunteerism and charity work is second to none in this entire world. that's actually part of our american exceptionalism, it's what makes us unique an different from many places on this earth. but i'd like to know the american who thinks that given everything i just listed that they think that fits their definition of poor. and that's who we should be helping. and not others who really, really need, again, that temporary hand up and not the

permanent handout. mr. speaker, we believe in the freedom of individuals to make their own choices and also the responsibility to live with the choices that they make. and perhaps more than anything else i've said here tonight, we are losing sight of that in this congress in this federal government. the free enterprise system is a beautiful system. it's a wonderful system that rewards risks and rewards those who do useful work. is it a perfect system? absolutely not. is it the best system ever devised by man to raise the condition of all men? absolutely. nothing in history has ever compared to it and no experimentation that we're going to do now, mind you, they're not new experiments, these experts have been tried, is going to make it any better. the free enterprise system absolutely works. we believe that each generation should leave the next generation better off to enjoy life, to

enjoy liberty, to enjoy the pursuit of happiness. and unfortunately, mr. speaker, everyone knows on the floor of this house and elsewhere day by day that we are not leaving the next generation better off. we are going to be the first generation in the history of this great nation based on the facts, based on our budget, based on our debt, based on our standard of live that will not leave the next generation better off if we don't start living within our means again if we don't stop printing and boar reing the money we're doing to fund this beast called the federal government. the book of proverbs commends hard work and enjoying the frutes of one's labor. with the money we earn, we provide for our family well, can bless other people who are in need. overbs says a god man leaves an inheritanceo ildren's n. god man es

i can't think of a high source to make the point. we are breaking the promise to the next generation. the good news is, mr. speaker, that, again, these are our core values. they're not republican core values necessarily. they're not democrat ones. they are american ones. you might find things that sound like them in the democratic party platform, i know we practice them in the republican party platform but again they're not ours. they're america's. everything i said here tonight is defined explicitly in the constitution. that great founding document that is in my opinion the core of our american exceptionalism. now when i say american exceptionalism, it's not that i'm thinking about it as our president has thought about it.

i don't mean to say that we're a country that judges others. i don't even mean to say that we're a country that thinks cat glorically we're better than others. like i said at the outset, we have our own struggles in this family, this national family. but the fact of the matter is, mr. speaker, we are different. and it's this document this constitution, that in large part sets off this difference. and here's why. the constitution, the core values it contain the things i have just recited, all represent the best ideas for self-governance that the world has ever known. never before in world history have those ideas ever come before together at the same time in the same place except for in the united states constitution. that's unique.

that makes us exceptional. now the president, when asked about this, said, oh, yes, america is exceptional. we believe we're exceptional, just like the brits think they're exceptional, like thiermans might think they're exceptional, entirely missing the point and lacking the understand -- understanding of the founding of this country. and i bring that up today, mr. speaker, to get the word out and make record in this house of representatives that's not at all what this country is about. again, it doesn't mean we're judge, it doesn't mean we think we are better, we are unique. we are the best experiment in self-governance the world has ever known. and the only thing that can mess that up, that can destroy that exceptionalism, is us. and that's what brings me to th.

on a thursday night. it's important stuff. i'd like to focus on, in my time remaining, mr. speaker, this debt that i've mentioned a few times now. of all the issues that we face, of all the issues we can properly and rightfully alleviate as a federal government, as a congress, it's this spending that is one of our charter things, one of our enumerated powers to set the federal government's size and spending levels an we have failed. i talk with you tonight, we are nearly $17 trillion in debt. but that's not even the half of it. the worst part, mr. speaker,le is this red section. this hundred trillion dollars that's on the way over the next 25 or so years. you see how vertical that line

goes? the real fear is that if we don't get our spending under control now, we might never be able to catch it. in fact, the -- the fact of the matter is, the drivers of our debt, social entitlement programs of medicaid, health care program of medicare, social security, the net interest we owe ourselves and other ountries means that it's growing so fast we may never be able to catch up. and that's a huge problem. these slides i'm showing the house are not todd rokita's slides. they're the budget committee's slide. the democrats don't disagree with the dita, but there's

disafwroment on how to fix the problem. many believe there's no a problem with the graph i just showed you. here's what the federal government is spending its money on. i pulled out two pieces of the slide -- two pieces of the pie to show that that's what we vote on in terms of our budget. nondefense discretionary and defense discretionary. we call this funding discretionary because we can dial it up or dial it down. depending on our wishes and our votes here in this congress and if the senate agrees or doesn't. the president chimes in, albeit late, certainly not on time with his budget but it focuses on not more than about 40% of our total federal spending. the rest of it, mr. speaker, it's all on auto pilot. we don't get to dial it up or dial it down. i don't get to decide what the retirees in this country will get in terms of a social security check. i don't get to decide what services they're going to get or

what fees their health care providers will pay for those services through medicare. that's all decided in the underlying, substantive bills we passed regarding those programs. and unless we amend those programs, unless we amend that law, we'll never get to what's driving most of our debt. representing about 2/3 of our federal spending. again, social security, $768 billion per year. medicare $466 billion per year. medicaid $251 billion per year. the interest we owe ourselves and every countriers in debt, $223 billion per year. other mandatory spending that i can't dial up or dial down, nor can you, mr. speaker, $547 billion per year all on auto pilot. until we get to this, mechanic, we'll never get to reducing or even stabilizing our debt. hat's the problem.

some people have asked about military spending and people asked about cutting it more, even though we had drastic cuts and people asked about foreign aid spending and earmark spending and wouldn't that solve the problem. all of that should be looked at. including the military. there is tremendous waste, fraud and abuse in our military system. and we try to get every possible dollar we can to the troops. even if we had no military, it would only solve 20% of our federal spending. and of course, one of our first constitutional duties is to provide for the common defense and a military is necessary and needs to be run a lot better. there is a lack of leadership right now amongst our military ranks. it is not leading when you come here to the congress asking