is hurting workers. vote for my colleague, mr. burgess -- my colleague, mr. burgess, laid that out clearly, they were promised if they liked their health care they could keep it and they're finding out that's simply not true. the delay of the employer mandate is the latest confirmation of the fatally flawed nature of obamacare and the need to dismantle it. that's why i support the proposal to delay the employer mandate for one year as well as a bill the us house will also consider today to delay enforcement of the individual mandate. . in less than a year, individuals who fail to purchase government-approved health insurance will be forced to pay higher taxes. it isn't right, mr. speaker, to deny american families the same relief available to american businesses. the american people didn't ask for this government takeover of health care, and they don't want it. let's give every family and business the reprieve from obamacare they deserve. i urge my colleagues to support

this rule and the underlying legislation, 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 texas. reserves the balance of his time. the gentlelady from new york is recognized. ms. slaughter: mr. speaker, before i yield time i'd like to ask unanimous consent to insert in the record the article from "the new york times" this morning entitled health plan costs for new yorkers to fall 50%. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. ms. slaughter: i yield two minutes to the gentleman from connecticut, mr. courtney. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from connecticut is recognized for two minutes. mr. courtney: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, the premise of h.r. 2667, the employer mandate bill, which is part of the rule here today, is that somehow that the administration overreached by announcing this postponement of the employer tax measure which was part of the affordable care act. the fact of the matter is that the proponents have picked up the phone and called the congressional research service and asked them if the i.r.s. has postponed imposition of statutorily required tax

requirements. the fact of the matter they would have found out what i hold in my hand which is a memo that was issued today that cites four examples, just within the last two or three years, where the i.r.s. delayed statutory reporting requirements because of the fact that comments from private sector voices around the country warned that it needed more time to be implemented. the 2006 law imposing a 3% withholding requirement effective december 31, 2010, was thrade until 2012. the -- was delayed until 2012. the foreign account tax complaints withholding act was postponed two years. again, because of a comment that came in from the private sector and the f.a.a. law which was passed in 2011 which had a retroactive collection of excise tax that was waived by the i.r.s. again because of the fact that after passage of the act

they listened to the american people and to the american business community about the fact that there were some honest to god logistical issues that needed to be worked out. that's exactly what was announced right before the july 4 weekend. mr. speaker, i would ask that this congressional research memo be admitted to the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. courtney: so we at least have some reality basis about what exactly occurred here. this is totally within the i.r.s.'s province authority with well established press kent. the fact of the matter is this vote is a nullity. it does nothing as a matter of law. c.b.o. has quoted as zero. we are just filling up more time here. the fact is we have people all over this country whose paychecks are being furloughed because of inaction by this congress. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. ms. slaughter: would the chairman like another minute? i yield the gentleman another minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. courtney: because of inaction of this congresspeople are losing 20% of their paycheck. that's what's hurting the american economy right now. we have a bipartisan immigration bill which cleared the senate

which we know from c.b.o. would actually reduce the deficit and grow the economy. that's what we should be voting on. we have a bipartisan farm bill which passed the senate which again provides a real horizon for rural america. that's what we should be voting on. instead we are filling this chamber up with more of the tired rhetoric for a bill that and absolutely nothing which the congressional research service shows us is completely, totally outside of well established precedent of american law. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentlelady from new york reserves. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. burgess: thank you, mr. speaker. i would like to yield to the distinguished chairman of the rules committee, mr. sessions from texas, as much time as he may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. sessions: thank you very much, mr. speaker. i want to thank the gentleman, the member of the rules committee, dr. michael burgess, from texas. dr. burgess is a brand new member of the rules committee and came to the rules committee because of his understanding not

just of medicine and health care as a doctor and provider for many, many years, but also because of his grasp of knowledge of this health care bill which is an enormous bill which, while we are talking about the economic consequences primarily today on the marketplace where this bill is causing employers to not hire more employees, is causing more employers to take to part-time worker status their employees, because of the extreme ramifications of this, what was called affordable care act known as the obamacare act, and today we are here for the simple purpose to say that the president of the united states has now recognized, without comment, and done not just in the middle of the night on the website, but even done on a

weekend, and i believe when the president potentially was out of the country, we are now dealing with the united states congress speaking our viewpoints about that bill. and the gentleman, dr. burgess, is going to consume time today where he's going to talk about also the problems that physicians have, that patients have, that we look at from a family perspective of trying to make sure we get health care in an affordable way without ruining it. but today i'd like to focus, if i can, my comments on, it's not a surprise we have a problem. weighs not a surprise we have a problem with this -- it's not a surprise we have a problem with this obamacare, or the affordable care act, not because of the concept that it is, and not because of how it was run through this congress, but really the concept of that the democrats are trying to overlay

on the american people a system of government-controlled health care that does not work. it does not work and will not work in america because america had a vibrant, free enterprise system whereby a person, whether they are an employer or employee just a member, as a regular citizen, could contract to get the health care that they would choose to have. and the reason why health care has become more expensive is that the federal government does not pay their fair share for medicare or medicaid. this united states congress does not adequately pay their fair are for our seniors or for poor people. so what happens is it's taken

out on people that work. it is showing up in their cost of health care. to fix r thans trying their problem and responsibility, what president obama and democrats did is stick it more of it, the cost and a system on the american worker rather than living up to their responsibility. and we are here today because the president of the united states got worried because he's hearing so many people come back and say, this won't work in america. this is harming job creation. this is harming businesses that want to employ people, and it's causing a huge distortion in the marketplace. he said we will back off this for a year. we heard testimony everything is

ok. everything is ok. we just are trying to hear back, feedback from business and we are going to back off for a year. that's not really the case. the facts of the case are that this administration from top to failed to provide information to the american people and to business about how they intended for their socialist government-run plan to work. and they have not provided leadership for three years. they have not answered questions. they have not made decisions. they have not been open about how it would really work. so business has the problem of a legal side. they have a legal responsibility . you won't have the white house

come out and admit this, but ey have failed to do their job. so business has a legal requirement on them of providing notice. they have noticed that they have to provide to consumers under state laws and under federal law, and the facts of the case are, they couldn't figure it out because they did not know enough about how this government-run health care system would work. they didn't understand legal consequences. they don't understand reporting consequences. they don't understand consequences because this government is so big and so powerful that they controlled too much of our life. now, in this equation we also see where a number of unions have now let their opinion be known and they are directly on

the side of this bill today because now they have learned more about this bill, and they are worried. they are worried sick about not just the health care for their members, but how it will individually affect their own families' lives. the facts of the case are simple. the democrat party here is trying to do everything they can do to cover up what is a monster mistake, an inability by the obama administration to effectively lead on a government-run health care system. and they are only -- their only backup point is if you do this you'll put everything in jep pardony. my response is thank goodness. it needs to be in jeopardy. what they have done is effectively picked on by doing

do what they have done individuals who are not as powerful as groups of individuals, collectively under business or labor unions. we need to look at the entire scope of this. what is bad for business is superbad for individuals. and individuals are going to find themselves at the behest of working with the i.r.s. on their health care, they are going to work with the i.r.s., an organization that is incapable of effectively delivering a fair product and rationally following the law. they think they are above the law. they think that they can control our lives, and in fact, mr. speaker, they can. so there's far more to this entire debate than simply we are trying to go against precedent of what this president has within his authorities or responsibilities or precedents.

far bigger than that what we are this obamato say is, health care plan and his decision that he has made about not moving forward with the law is a selective enforcement, and it's really their fault. it is their fault for lack of leadership. it is their fault because they passed a bill that was entirely done by the united states senate, and we agreed up in the rules committee no republican in this house that we would simply take it as it was without understating it, without making it workable, and without ever understanding the consequences, because the bottom line is, democrats have been trying to do this for 50 years. and what they are really after is a single payer system where the government literally completely makes every decision, not some of the decisions.

so republicans on the floor of the house today to say we ought to repeal the whole thing. we are going to start by this action today, and we are going to follow it up by saying we ought to give individuals the me opportunity to evade this that the president has given to special interest and to business. it's a sad day today, but let's to the twist the facts of the case. a government-run health care system is at its very basis a beginning of socialism in medicine. and we oppose that. i thank the speaker for the time. i thank the gentleman for the time. i yield back the balance of my time. we reserve our time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas reserves. the gentlelady from new york. ms. slaughter: mr. speaker, by happenchance i have some figures here that will explain to my colleague, my friend, mr. sessions, chair of the rules committee, what will really happen in his district if he should have his way and this

would go away, and who is really going to be hurt and who really s going to be in jeopardy. are on their parents' insures. the more that 6,600 seniors are receiving discount drugs. 66,000 seniors are now eligible for medicare preventive services without paying co-pays, co-insurance, or deductible. 182,000 individuals in his district, including 39,000 children and 74,000 women now have the health insurance right now that covers preventive services without co-pays, co-insurance, or deductibles. 182,000 individuals are saving money due to the a.c.a. provisions that prevent insurance companies from spending more than 20% of their

premiums on profits and administrative overhead. over 56,000 have received insurance company rebates. 6.5 million, i wonder how many in my district. an average rebate of at least $95 a family. up to 4 ,000 children in his district with pre-existing health conditions can no longer be denied coverage. 237,000, that's a lot of constituents, in the district, now have insurance that cannot place a lifetime limit on their coverage and will not face an annual limit for what will be covered. up to 152,000 individuals in his district who lack health insurance will have access to quality affordable coverage without fear of discrimination or higher rates because of a pre-existing condition. in addition, the 43,000 individuals who currently

purchase private health -- on ce on his district the market will have better coverage and many will be eligible for financial assistance. i think i made the point that those are the people who are going to be hurt should he get his wishes today. i'd like to yield two minutes to the gentleman from new jersey, mr. andrews. mr. andrews: the gentleman is ecognized for two minutes. -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. andrews: thank you, mr. speaker. the gentleman said the facts should not be twisted. i agree. here's some facts the house and the country should have under consideration as we debate the bill. we hear repeatedly on the other side that the affordable care act is a job-killing health care law. in the months prior to the enactment of the affordable care act, the economy lost 6.9 million jobs. in the months since the

enactment of the affordable care act, the economy has gained 6.5 million jobs. if it were true, that the affordable care act is a job-killing health care law than why do the numb of jobs go up and not down? hear that re -- -- the act is responsible for an explosion in health care premiums. today the state of new york reported that the bids on offering coverage through the new york exchange have come in and the typical new york whore buys insurance for him or herself will have a premium 50% lower than they do today. similar numbers have been reflected in california, in oregon, in washington, and in other states around the country. if it were true that the affordable care act has led to an explosion of premium hourks do we explain what's happened in new york, california, oregon, and washington and

other states? finally, we hear the conclusion,s that socialist takeover of the health care system by the government. here's the way it works. a person will go into the exchange, receives a voucher a tax credit, shops among competing private health insurance plans and chooses the one that they like best for their family. much in the nature of a pell grant or f.h.a. loan when one is buying a house. the house deserves the facts. it is not factual that jobs have gone down since the law was passed they've gone up. it is not factual that premiums have skyrocketed. in the places where the laws have been implemented, they've gone down. finally, government takeover is false, this is a consumer takeover of health care away from ethis insurance companies. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentlelady from new york reserves. the gentleman is recognized.

mr. burgess: may i inquire as to the remaining time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman has 10 1/2 minutes. mr. burgess: i'd like to yield gentleman to the from indiana, mr. bucshon. the chair: the -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. bucshon: i was a practicing physician for 15 years and i rise today to support the rule and in support of delaying the affordable care act employer and individual mandates. i support the delays because it's unfair to employees in my district who have suffered lost wages and lost hours of work because of these mandates. the 54 employees in the green castle school district who had hours cut from full-time to part-time, the 150 employees in the washington county school district who were tutt from -- cut from full time to part time. employees in one county who were cut from 40 hours to week to 20 hours a week, and wolf auto auction that cut many employees from full to part time.

there are countless other middle class hoosiers suffering across indiana because of these mandates. they're school bus drivers, teachers, hospital nurses, county government employees, whosier -- hoosiers work hard every day to provide for their family and rather than helping them, the government is keeping them from doing it this ja manages -- this administration would like us to believe that the economy is growing. they failed to mention that 500,000 of the jobs added were part time. it's hard to find a job when the government is penalizing your employer for giving you full-time work. my colleagues support this legislation that they know has compromised opportunity to find good-paying jobs and provide for your family yet they stand here an argue that that has not been the case. one year delay to these mandates is just a band-aid. i'll be voting in favor of the rule and the bills and

ultimately need to fully repeal the affordable care act. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from texas reserves. the gentlelady from new york is ecognized. ms. slaughter: if we defeat the previous question, we want to offer an amendment to the rule that athroice house to consider the investing in american jobs act of 201. this bill would ensure at last that federally funded transportation and infrastructure projects are constructed with steel, iron, and manufactured goods made in america. to discuss this proposal, i will yield three minutes to the gentleman from west virginia, the distinguished raking member of the commone transportation and infrastructure, mr. rahall. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. rahall: thank you, mr. speaker. madam ranking member of the rules committee, i appreciate the kind words. mr. speaker, when i go home to west virginia each week and discuss the state of our nation with my friends an neighbors, i

hear about three things. first is jobs. second is jobs. and the third is jobs. that's what this congress should focus on. we should stop the political charade of spending time on one bill after another which will not see the light of day in the other body and work together on something that members of all political stripes should be able to agree upon. creating american jobs and ensuring that our federal tax dollars are spent wisely. we are here today in support of those twin goals. by ensuring that investments we make in our nation's transportation infrastructure truly help rebuild america. our infrastructure. our companies. and our workers. mr. speaker, in just a few months' time one of the largest publicly supported infrastructure projects in this country is scheduled to be pleated with the opening of the 6.3 billion east span of the

san francisco-oakland bay bridge. but instofede steel cast in the algonies or road bed segments assembled in alameda, cars and trucks using the bridge will be riving over 43,000 tons of steel imported from china. which supported 3,000 chinese jobs and which -- and was financed by u.s. taxpayers. last year, our committee on transportation and infrastructure democrats insisted on closing the loopholes in our buy america laws to prevent the continuation of this outrageous and economically harmful of -- harmful practice of outsourcing federal highway construction as art of the highway surface act. unfortunately, despite getting 244 vote thopes floor, many

provisions we pushed for that would have guaranteed strong buy american requirements for all service transportation infrastructure investments were left on the cutting room floor in the conference process. today we're here to finish the job and ensure that all taxpayer funded infrastructure investments support american jobs. if we debt pete the -- defeat the previous question, ms. slaughter, will offer an amendment to the rule that will make in order h.r. 949, the invest in america jobs act of 2013 under an open rule. it requires domestic manufacturing, it ensures that bridges, light rail and other systems will be stamped made in america. and crafted with american workmanship. by closing critical loopholes in our buy america laws for ublic transit rolling stock,

these projects paid for by u.s. taxpayers will be used to improve our economy. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas. mr. burgess: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from new york is recognized. ms. slaughter: mr. speaker, i would like to yield for a unanimous consent request. ms. jackson lee: i would like and i yield rule back. ms. slaughter: i'm pleased to yield two minutes to the gentleman from new york, because of our great news this morning, mr. bishop. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. bishop: we did indeed get great news in new york today with respect to how the exchanges in the affordable care act will affect premiums next year in new york. i rise to oppose the rule and urge members to defeat the previous question so that the house may consider the invest in america jobs act introduced

by my friend and colleague mr. rahall, the distinguished ranking member of the transportation infrastructure committee. this critically important legislation would support domestic manufacturing and create american jobs by strengthening buy american requirements for investments in our nation's infrastructure. i strongly support provisions that will permanently codify buy american requirement for our nation's clean water infrastructure investment program. when congress first enacted the clean water act in 1972, it required that any grant funding for waste water infrastructure then funded through the construction grants program be used to support, quoting now, articles, materials or supplies mined, produced or manufactured in the united states. close quote. unfortunately, in 19 7, when then-president ronald reagan urged congress to abolish the construction grants programs in favor of the current clean water s.r.f., these initial buy

america requirements expired. it was not until 2009 when congress enacted the recoughry act that buy american provisions were restored for federal investment through the clean water s.r.f. what was remarkable was both how adept the nation's westwater industry and the states were at quickly and successfully implementing these commonsense reforms and how important these investments were to breathing life back into a faltering domestic supply chain for wastewater infrastruck chumple as the recovery act demonstrated, the buy american requirements can work, can be implemented with relative efficiency and most importantly create jobs both in the casting of -- casting of raw materials and the finishing work. i strongly support reinstatement of the buy american requirements that are contained in this bill. i urge members to support american jobs by ede-feeting the previous question and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from new york

reserves. the gentleman from texas. mr. burgess: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from new york is recognized. ms. slaughter: i'm pleased to yield two minutes to the gentlewoman from florida, ms. brown. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for two minutes. ms. brown: today as we finish the job to ensure that all taxpayer-funded support american jobs. if we defeat the previous question, the gentlewoman from new york, the ranking member on the committee on rules, ms. slaughter, will offer an amendment to the rules that will make it in order h.r. 949 the investment in american jobs act of 2013. under the open rule. h.r. 949 strengthens domestic manufacturing requirements not highways, eral aid transit, aviation and other infrastructure investment but also in rail. when i was chair of the subcommittee on railroad pipelines i held a round table on the importance of buying american in rail projects.

well over 100 american companies participated and advocated for strong rules. as a result, we included the provision in the rail investment imprusme act of 2008 which required that the federal funded rail projects using domestic steel, iron, and other manufacturing goods. we heard a lot of complaints but five years later, we know that it worked and let me just say in rochelle, illinois, they just created more than 300 jobs using american companies. h.r. 949 would extend this same buy american requirement to amtrak and rail red rehabilitation programs. when i came to transportation every billion dollars we spent in infrastructure created 33,000 new jobs. now because of the provision buy america for every billion llars we spend, it creates

43,890 good paying american jbs. -- jobs. i urge the house to defeat the previous question so we can consider this important bill. i yield back the plans of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. the gentlewoman from new york. . ms. slaughter: may i inquire of my colleague if he has more speakers? i'm prepared to close. mr. burgess: i'm prepared to close as well. ms. slaughter: thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from new york is recognized. ms. slaughter: before i close, i want to ask unanimous consent dr. burgess is a good doctor and i want to put in the same statistics that i read for chairman sessions for his district, almost a third of his constituents would be involved, and i know he's going to want to read that in the record. let me get to closing, as i repeatedly said over the last three years, the majority began wasting valuable time, millions of taxpayer dollars to vote for

the 39th time to undermine the affordable health care act. meanwhile, they have not taken a single vote on jobs in this congress. so we are going to be able to give you a chance to remedy that. i ask unanimous consent to insert the text of the amendment in the record along with extraneous material immediately prior to the vote on the previous question. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. slaughter: mr. speaker, i want to urge my colleagues to vote no, defeat the previous question so that we can really begin to work on our infrastructure and get americans back to work. i urge a no vote on the rule 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 texas is recognized. mr. burgess: thank you, mr. speaker. let's also deal with a couple things that have been said during the last hour of debate. the gentleman from connecticut stood up and provided c.r.s. report that detailed various times in the past where rules have been delayed.

the department of treasury regarding tax law. but what he listed were all bills that have passed since president obama came into office, and they had all had to be postponed because they were ill-conceived and ill thought out. i would just submit that it was december 24 of 2009 when this thing passed out of the united states senate. if, as the gentlelady says, is correct that they sat down and read the thing line by line three times, they were bound to have encountered page 159, paragraph d, effective date, the amendments made by this section shall apply to the month beginning after december 31, 013. mr. speaker, i would just submit the department of treasury said this was going to be a problem, they have known about it for almost four years. where have they been? and why was it necessary for it to come up on july 2 at 6:00

p.m.? from aker, i have asked representatives from the administration, representatives from the agencies, what are you doing? are there contingency plans? this thing looks awfully complicated and complex? can you get it done? are you thinking about delaying it? are you thinking about jettisoning other parts? as late as end of april, first of may, i was told no, there are no such plans. the administrator for the center for medicaid and medicare services in a hearing testified sometime in june we made the decision we were going to have to do something here. this is inconsistent coming from the administration. we asked for information, and no information was forthcoming. then we are accused of being obstructionist. you never wanted the law in the first place. maybe so, but how in the world can we have a meaningful

dialogue if we when you come into the committee and you are asked a direct question under oath that you won't respond accurately? the propensity for preverification of this administration has been absolutely stunning. now, we are here today because of a blog post on july 2 at 6:00 p.m. i would very much like to get the author of this blog post into our committee on oversight and investigations on energy and mmerce and ask her, just exactly what was going on, what led to this decision. did you get a legal memo? did you get information from some legal counsel as to the fact that this was ok? i would welcome that opportunity . mr. speaker, you and i know that that opportunity is never going to occur. mr. speaker, today's rule provides for the consideration of two critical bills ensuring that the american people are not penalized for this administration's inability to implement its own law properly. i applaud the efforts of my colleagues, mr. griffith and mr.

young, and i look forward to the debate on these two bills in the ensuing hours. i'm sure this house will produce spirited debate. for that reason i yield back the balance of my time and move the previous question on the resolution. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the question is on ordering the previous question on the resolution. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. ms. slaughter: mr. speaker, i request the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. those favoring a vote by yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on the question will be postponed. pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1, the house will stand in recess subject to the call of

guest: we are still going to start accepting through the

state exchanges, in our case in texas we won't have a state exchange, we'll have a national exchange starting october 1. people can sign up for it for the policies to go into effect in january. in urban strict houston, people who work but don't have insurance through their employers. host: the house speaker had different thoughts when it comes to the individual mandate. here's a little what he had to say. listen to people. we'll get your response. >> if obamacare is so wonderful, why are health care prices exploding? why are millions of americans getting kicked out of their plans? why are so many workers losing their jobs or getting their hours cut? it's a isn't wonderful, train wreck. you know it, i know t. and the american people know t even the president knows it. that's why he proposed delaying his mandate on employers. but it's unfair to protect big businesses without giving the same relief to american families and small businesses.

host: to his statement there at the end. guest: i appreciate the speaker. he's a friend. but he and i disagree on it. i disagree it's a train wreck. any national program that's rolled out is going to have glitches in it. that's the job of the president and administration to fix those glitches before it goes into effect. he decided that the employer mandate, they didn't have the rules, i guess, in place for them, so they'll delay that a year. the individual mandate will stay there. there's been individual mandates proposed throughout the history. sometimes even by republican members of congress. but you can't get to health care for everyone unless people take responsibility. the employer, if you are over 50 employees like minimum wage, you have to have insurance from your employer. if you are an individual and you work, you are required to go -- if you don't get it through your employer, you can go through the state exchanges or national excheanings. host: what about the fairness argument he's making? guest: fairness, there's a lot

of fairness arguments in government, but if we are going to provide health care opportunity for everyone in our country, we are going to have to get through these glitches over the next six months or so and figure out how to do it. republicans, we voted 37 times to repeal affordable care act. they like to call it obamacare. they lost. it never has passed the senate. and it would be vetoed by the president. this is just another way that they want to oppose providing an opportunity for health care for all. i would be glad to be on the record fade saying, no. we voted in 2010, it passed the law. it's not a perfect law. i'd like to amend it. my frustration with the majority in the house is that there are things in the law we could fix on a bipartisan basis. they don't want to do that. there is a number of issues in there. i'm not a big one on the independent group to decide what insurance requirements you have.

there's a lot of things in there. they don't want to do that. they just want to repeal the law. again, i have one of the highest districts in the country of people who work and who don't have insurance through their employer. so this would give them an opportunity. host: our guest here to talk about today's votes on the affordable care act, you can ask him questions about it on one of three lines this morning, 202-585-3880 for democrats, 202-585-3881 for republicans. 202-585-3882 for independents. c-span wj is the twitter address. and post something on facebook. when it comes to the exchanges, health insurance exchanges and the marketplaces, a couple things to be affair of. on october 1 the open enrollment starts.

guest: we are getting ready to roll it out over the next couple months. working with health and human services and also our regional offices. i'm scheduling a big event in our district where people can come in and hear from both health and human services, but also our navigators. they are selecting different groups all over the country in the houston area where i represent, we'll have nonprofit groups that help people actually apply for that insurance. or show them ow they can do it. defending -- depending on your income you'll get subsidies to afford that health care. what we are hearing first, i notice just this morning, i heard some of the exchanges are coming in. costs are substantially lower than what they expected. my concern was, i want to make sure we have a robust exchange. we have a number of carriers there. this is not a government-run insurance. you're going to go buy an insurance policy fromet in a, from significant in a, blue cross, abc company, you name it. it will be private sector, but they will have to comply with

federal rules on how they market their -- that product through those exchanges. host: california, democrats line, joe is up first for our representative gene green, hello. caller: good morning. i'm a veteran and i appreciate your focus on veteran concerns. i want to ask on behalf of many veterans i know have the same question, why is congress ignoring the thousands of building experts demanding a real investigation of why building 7 fell on 9/11? this is very important and there is overwhelming evidence that explosives were used to destroy it. thank you. host: are you sure there is an organized effort out there to answer these questions you can respond. guest: i serve on the energy and commerce committee. all of us remember where we were at on 9/11. i was here in washington. doing a press conference. there have been untold number investigations as there have been on other tragedies. i'm not familiar with that allegation. i'm sure that district attorney or folks and many members of

congress on the intelligence committee who would be glad to hear that. host: republican line, hello. caller: good morning. guest: good morning. caller: i recall in 1972 you were running for state office and you were going door to door through lynndale. guest: i grew up in that area. i was in their fourth of july parade last week. caller: that was the first year i could vote. and i told my fiance, i'm going to vote for that man because he's working hard for what he wants. you came to the door, there was sweat on your brow. you didn't have any gray hair at that time, of course. guest: hi a lot more hair. caller: but here we are 40 years later and i'm a retired pharmacist by the way, and we have tens of millions of americans who don't work hard anymore. they just wait for the government check to come in. this health care system is going to be gamed the same way these other systems have been gamed.

i'll give you an example. i'm a cancer survivor and i was treated at anderson. when i went there there were people from all over the world coming to that place to be treated. from countries that had overnment health care. and i don't understand why people can't see that. host: let the guest respond. guest: first of all the affordable care act is not government-run health care. i know people talk about the canadian system. this is not the canadian system. this is not the great britain system or even most of the places in the world. this is a system where the free market insurance companies will join these exchanges and they will have rules they have to go by, federal rules nationwide, to sell insurance policies. in the 1970's, lynndale is similar to what it was back then, it's an area not a wealthy

area, a lot of hardworking folks who work hard for what they have, again in the district like i represent in houston harris county, they shouldn't have to work hard and still have to not have some type of insurance product. and this will give them their opportunity. they'll have to pay for some of it. if they are low-income they'll be able to get subsidies. they will have some type of insurance product in our contry. host: this is otis from livermoore, california. democrats' line, good morning. caller: good morning. good morning, representative. i wanted to call and make a couple comments and also get your thoughts on a couple of things. one, it seems very apparent that the only purpose of these two pieces of legislation that the republicans are pushing forward is just a part of their political agenda. they failed to cooperate in every avenue in trying to move

these laws forward. 27 states that won't put the exchanges in. all of these things have contributed to the delay in the -- the necessary delay in , and -- i wanted to get your opinion on that. and i'd also like to express on a couple of things, your predecessor speaker from the republican party. guest: first of all, the majority of the house is republican. during the last congress and starting this congress we voted 37 times to repeal the affordable care act, or obamacare. it's passed the house. i voted against it most of the time i speak against it because their solution is going back to what we were before. now, the affordable care act not perfect. there is nothing in congress that we pass that will be

perfect. we need to go back and amend it and fix the things we know that's wrong with t they don't want to do that. all they want to do is repeal it. their replacement is nothing. we are going to do that again today. that's probably why our favorable rating is -- favorable rate something 10%. we are not passing things we are passing messages and the american people want us to work on the issues of our country. host: a quick list in your opinion of what's wrong with the law. guest: a lot of it is what the senate did in all honesty. they put in what's called an ipad that would set up this group of experts to decide what insurance product or what was listed under insurance product. that should be left up to the elected officials. i would vote today, in fact we defeated it in the house. the higher income issues that the senate put in and ended up affecting a lot of the collective bargaining agreements in my district. that was something we defeated in the house. we need to work on things we can

pass and will make it better instead of just repealing it. like i said the last over two years all we have seen is repeal of it instead of sitting down and working on trying to solve approximate. host: the bill on mandates is authority on delay act. from the republican from ackafpblgt fairness for americans families act is the individual mandate portion that's representative todd yuck, republican from indiana. sponsoring that. -- todd young, republican from indiana sponsoring that. caller: i have a question about the care act. i don't see how they can say is is good for everyone when my situation, my husband's insurance will triple in cost. i cannot find a job in my rural area in georgia because the companies' not hiring due to the care act. another question i have is, how is it whenever i take my children to the doctor, here it is, i don't have insurance

because we cannot actually seerd that insurance, and i people who has medicare, medicaid and all this other government assistance whenever they are not legal citizens. how can we afford to keep giving them care -- guest: let me correct you somewhere. someone who is here that's not a citizen under federal law if you are a legal resident, whoever sponsored you has to guarantee to cover your social cost for five years. now, if you're saying there are undocumented coming in there and getting medicare and medicaid, that's a felony in texas, i assume it is in georgia. and i would report that to your local district attorney if you know of someone who is receiving any kind of federal assistance and using a fake social security number, that's a felony in most states. so it's against the law. as far as your husband's insurance going up, when i was

in the private sector i negotiated for a printing company. our insurance, we had 13 employees. believe me, we did not get quotes because nobody wanted to cover a small company. so i fought with insurance companies for our employees and the owners to do it. i don't see what the affordable care act would raise the price of somebody who already has it. now, we are hoping it would bring it down lower because if you're paying for insurance right now, then you're paying for millions of people who are showing up at those emergencies rooms -- emergency rooms guaranteed to get health care. we want them to put some skin in the game. we want them to be part of the system if they can afford it. host: this from twitter -- 7 guest: well, i knew that state would do it. i served many years in the state legislature and texas has a very although it's expensive for

texas, we are large state, our medicaid program not very good. the schip plan, when we started the children's health care plan in the 1990's, texas delayed two years compared to other states. what i asked for in the bill we were debating is we need some type of national plan that does not require the state to approve it. now, because of the supreme court ruling on the medicaid expansion, we lost that. but we are going to have a robust national exchange that will help the people in texas go to it starting october 1 and apply for health care. whereas in the state of texas we don't have that opportunity. state's not a part of it. it's a national exchange we'll have. host: pennsylvania, christine, democrats line, good morning. caller: hi. our daughter's a doctor and i have asked her several times, how do you feel about owe obamacare? i call about obamacare because i care, too. she has told me each time i asked her, she loves obamacare, and the reason she loves

obamacare is because her patients, her kids get care. it's that simple. she told me one other thing about obamacare, that doctors don't get paid for procedures. they get paid by outcome, which may be a big part of the big fuss over this from my point of view, not from hers, but from my point of view, physicians like to make money. they are no different than anybody else. and this will eliminate unnecessary procedures. this will eliminate a cash flow. guest: i support the affordable care act. like i said it's not perfect. i worked with our texas medical association, lots of doctors even to this day on making it work. i have a very urban district and my doctors don't have enough time in a day to see all the people. we have a loft things we still need to do with health care. this is not the end all be all.

it's a step forward to provide opportunity for people everywhere in the country to have healthy insurance product. that's why a lot of doctors say people show up without health care they are going to treat them. insurance. at least this time they'll have an opportunity to have insurance. host: one viewer said i would rather have a single payer system than this. obamacare written for insurance companies not us. guest: we had a single payer, lost in the senate, never even came up. single payer wasn't an option. the votes were not there in the house or senate in 2010 under democratic control. as you know today it would never get anywhere. host: josh from louisiana. joins us on the republican line for representative gene green from texas, hello. caller: yes, mr. green. guest: good morning. caller: this seems very familiar to me in my state you have to have liability if you have a car. and when that law first passed it went realry well. everything was good.

and our car insurance prices are through the roof. also you got all these other programs that help with these things, with medicare. medicaid, social security, most states have medicare. why do we need another rather than reusing what we have to make it more efficient? guest: a good example the last caller talked about single payer. after world war ii most countries that we rebuilt -- japan, western europe, had a single payer government-run insurance, even canada. our country, though, we went to employer-based insurance. that worked for 20 to 30 years. but what we have seen employers in the last 10 or 15 years dropping that coverage. so you're working, not poor enough to get medicaid, not over 65 to get medicare, there is a gap in there for you and your family.

so for years congress and even some states have tried to deal with it. the affordable care act was a step by congress to be able to deal with a -- millions of people in our country who work who don't have the opportunity to have insurance through their employer because the employer doesn't have a mandate. we now have a mandate all on this vote president delayed it. we still have an individual candidate so folks can buy insurance. host: our guess service on the house -- oversight investigations. the story this morning about a new report that was released from consumer watchdog talks about the keystone x.l. pipeline, it says it would push retail gasoline prices 20 to 40 cents a gallon higher, with prices spiking most in the west. if it was built, canadian oil sells international benchmark groups, and western drivers will hardest hit because the regionor imports more than half

the oil from canada. can i get your point? guest: the president will make a decision i hope sooner than later. it's been delayed. the president and this administration actually approved a pipeline into the midwest in the early part of this administration. this pipeline would come all the way from can in a and texas. i represent a heavy refining district. that report i have read it, heard this before over -- it's kind of recycled. right now the heavy canadian crude goes to the west refineries. this would give those canadian producers another option. that pipeline would still be to the midwest, but they would be one to the gulf coast. i guess you could say if there is competition, that price -- it's the only sale they can do in the united states, but they'll now have two places to sell it. that's premarket system. we have a refining capacity instead of importing oil from he venezuela we can import it from canada. that makes great sense to me because canada is our closest friend and neighbor.

and -- our refineries need that in our country. there may be a price spike, but it's interesting. we are spiking prices right now and keystone is not opened. it's not even been approved yet. but there is that pipeline into that midwest where maybe they are enjoying lower prices because that's their own outlet. again, if you have different options, canada can train the oil in just like now. they are training sending it on tank cars into areas that don't have a pipeline. we are talking about the difference between having a train bring it or a pipeline bring it. host: where do you stand on keystone? guest: i'm a big supporter of it. like i said, we have a refining capacity, we improperty -- my goal is to have our country as self-sufficient as we can on crude oil. we are doing better because of productions both in north dakota and south texas and midland area of texas. it's still not enough to support our country. so i'd rather bring it in from canada than other places.

host: what about environmental concerns because of it? guest: there is no exceptions. in east harris county we have five refineries. they are not getting exceptions for handling heavier crude from canada than a lighter crude from somewhere else. they still have to comply with our environmental laws in texas that's overseen by the e.p.a. there are no waivers on the environment for refining that product. guest: the white house has been holding their cards to the vest. it's hard for me to imagine they would not approve it. now i know environmental community has made this the end all be all on everything, but there are a lot of other issues environmentally that are as important instead of where we're going to buy our crude oil. we are going to buy our crude oil to support our refineries. do you want to buy from canada or venezuela or somewhere else that's heavier crude that don't -- they don't produce it as clean as canada does?

host: all right. next call is from clearwater, florida, democrats' line. this is phil. caller: good morning, sir. how are you today? guest: how are you? caller: my comment is about the health care system, and you made a statement earlier since world war ii and all the nation building that we have done or rebuilt countries that we destroyed, now, they all have national health care. now, we still nation build. we ship out more of our tax dollars -- i mean, american tax dollars to foreign countries that are actually our enemies, destroy america, they hate us. if we would quit doing that we could afford good health care for everybody in america and knock out the profit and the hospitals and stuff. this is where mica nadian neighbors tell me, oh, your health care system in america is nothing but medicine for profit.

and could you address that for me, please? guest: well, we do help a lot of people all over the world. the problem is it's probably less than 2% of our federal budget, and we look at every day in congress on how we can cut foreign assistance to countries that either don't need it or we shouldn't be providing it to them. but that is a very small part of what the health care costs would be to cover our huge number of uninsured in our country. so, you know, i wish we could trade that but that wouldn't be -- that's not possible. host: danny is up next from louisiana, independent line. hi. caller: hi, good morning. guest: good morning. caller: i would like to first of all like to make a statement and ask you a question. the last gentleman was a doctor, there's a lot of republican doctors, wealthy doctors that are all of a sudden in congress and they're fighting this thing. i'd just like to say what

happened to the health care in america that was called h.m.o.'s? back in the 1980's, thereby discovered, hey, there's money in disease. so they decided they'd make a lot of money off of it. thing is bamacare controlling their greed and these people obviously have a problem with it. now, as far as -- i was very touched by that man whining so much to the american public because i don't know a republican doing a damn thing for the american citizens. i like to know if it's medicare they're harping on, the problem they're going to have with medicare, is that based on them putting in that time bomb of the pharmaceutical plan, and if it is, why can't we do something about it? guest: well, one of the things you don't hear from the republican majority in the house is that the affordable care act actually extended the life of medicare to 2026. just e has a trust fund

like social security, but it's not a wealthy trust fund like social security is. and so the affordable care act actually extended medicare, the life of medicare for our seniors until 2026. we have to deal with it every year. there's nothing permanent in this government. if we did not appropriate money to the department of defense every year, we would not have a department of defense. if we don't appropriate money for medicare every year, we would not have medicare. so that's something congress has to do. but anyway, the affordable care act did a lot of good things, including make sure that prescription drug plan, we close the doughnut hole. by 2020 there would be no doughnut hole created by a republican congress and a republican president in 2003. our seniors need prescriptions but they don't need the system we created in congress. host: new port, massachusetts, republican line. this is jerry. caller: hi. thank you for c-span. i'm an old rockefeller republican so we don't exist very much anymore, but i did

want to describe what i continue to experience which i consider to be fraud in the system and find out if there's any way that users of the system can be protected. i just like to give a quick example. i was in the hospital -- i'm a medicare patient, and i was in the hospital for an extra day. the hospital billed medicare an extra $8,000 for that day which the hospital admitted was a mistake between two doctors that failed to communicate. about three -- and they told me they corrected the situation. about three weeks later, i called the hospital and said, yes, we refunded the $8,000 to medicare. about a week later, i had another appointment and i said, show me the paperwork, and the paperwork hadn't been submitted at all. i was just simply lied to by the hospital that this money had been refunded. when i demanded that they return the money to medicare and i gave them 24 hours to do

that which they responded. therwise i was going to notify medicare of fraud, they actually did refund the money. but when i spoke to two doctors family, they said, if i don't watch myself i'm going to be barred from using that hospital. and my wife and i are kind of tare rised. we find -- terrorized. we find it over and over again. misuse by doctors and the hospitals of medicare. and i'm trying to find out, is there anything called patient protection that would allow me to in fact call these hospitals out without worrying about whether i'm going to be able to get access to these hospitals. this is a billing situation. it's not a quality of service situation. guest: well, medicare -- again, we've been trying to deal with fraud and abuse of medicare for decades. just like you do any other program. but the affordable care act

actually plused up the tools we have to go after overbilling, fraudulent billing. in fact, in the last two years there's been a great success in getting money back to the federal government, to medicare that had been scammed. but, you know, one of the things you can do and massachusetts has like anyplace in the country, members of congress. contact your member of congress and ask them to contact medicare. medicare fraud is a felony, and whether it's a hospital or a doctor or an administrator of a hospital, it's also a fraud if somebody's scamming on the individual basis. there are ways to deal with it. i'm glad you took the lead on it. you can also contact your member of congress and ask them to investigate it and get back to you. host: reuters and others said that president obama first time admitted in interview with

spanish language television that the house of representatives would pass immigration reform before legislators left in august. guest: i'm a big supporter of immigration reform. texas, hispanics are prominent. i've been supporting it for years. we have 11 million people give or take who have not done anything but come here without proper authority. they have not violated our criminal laws. if they have they will get deported and they will under the new law. i hope congress will consider what the senate has passed. host: you are a total supporter of the senate bill? guest: well, i don't have a border district but i have family that live in brownsville, texas, and i've watched over the last 40 years and particularly the last 10, 12 years since 9/11 how that border has been hardened. we have walls, we have fences, we have personnel, and sure we need to protect our country and i want to do that, but the

senate i think went overboard in doing some of the things and actually wasting taxpayers' dollars. host: calling for standards or a certain amount of protection? guest: no, the senate -- throwing $30 billion at a program and not saying how it's going to be done. if you build a 30-foot wall, you ought to have somebody watching it because somebody will climb over, under or tunnel under it. there are ways we can control our border that is smarter and cheaper. it sounds like the house will do one-shot bills. we may start in the next week or so dealing with things that is coming out of the judiciary committee. that bill would then go to the senate. i assume the senate will attach whatever they're going to have in their comprehensive immigration reform bill to that. sometime i'd like to have an option to vote on what the senate has passed. i also know that they move us forward. host: could you support whatever comes from the house?

guest: well, i want to support something from the house. there are a couple requirements i have. one, i don't want to leave those 11 1/2 million people or so in limbo. a lot of members in the house say they don't want to give them a pathway to citizenship. except for slavery in our country and indingered servitude, we've not had someone that's been in limbo that after five years you could become a citizen. the senate bill it would take 13 years. i want to make sure they have that option. if they're legal residents, they're paying taxes. if they're not legal, now they may be paying taxes through their tax i.d. number. we want them to be taxpayers. that's why the congressional budget office said the senate bill will be a big winner for our federal deficit because we'd have these people who are working now, they would end up paying part of the taxes to help support our country. host: from new york, this is russell, democrats' line. hi. caller: yes. how you doing? guest: i'm doing all right.

caller: thanks to c-span. everything is -- i watch you guys every day. i'm calling to remind americans how the health care and how everything were -- i believe in reform, first of all. i'm trying to let everyone remember how bad it was, you know. it took someone to come into office and try to change things. people going to jail for all kinds of situations and it was horrible. we have someone trying to change and having a lot of problems with these people trying to change america because we are not the same place as we were before. and i love you, c-span. that's basically what i have to say. host: representative, what do you think about concerns, especially from democrats, about the rollout of the affordable care act? guest: well, they're working on it right now in health and human services. every week we have a briefing from the administration of what they're doing and how we're going to roll that out. it's a massive program, but we've done this before. we did the prescription drug

plan for seniors. in the 1930's we did social security. we did medicare in the 1960's. we can do it. we just need to have willing partners who are willing to say, yes, let's fix it. and there are some things in the law we need to fix to make it work. host: james is up next. he joins us from kentucky. republican line. caller: how are you all today? guest: i'm doing well. i hope you are. caller: doing pretty good. my wife is a nurse for 35 years. she recently changed jobs to a part-time job, wasn't able to acquire insurance from this doctor. so we went out and tried to get her some insurance. and my question is how long will she be able to get any because here in this part of kentucky, eastern kentucky, we only have about two, three carriers with insurance around this area and they turned her down because of a high

cholesterol test and she's never been in the hospital. never been what we call sick. but because she had a high cholesterol level -- i won't mention the company -- but they turned her down for insurance. will she be able to get insurance and if so when? guest: starting october 1 under the exchanges -- and i'm not familiar with kentucky, whether they have a state exchange or doing the national exchange, but she can apply for health insurance. and part of the affordable care act, obamacare, the insurance company cannot consider pre-existing conditions. they have to provide you insurance. through the exchange starting october 1 she will be able to pply for insurance and whatever companies who are on that exchange in kentucky. so starting october 1 she can do that. there's a lot of information in the next two, three months that

will come out but the insurance won't go into effect until january. host: roger is from houston, texas, independent caller. guest: glad somebody from houston won't make fun of my accent. caller: no, i won't make fun of your accent. i have a couple comments to make. guest: yes, sir. caller: we are going through all this -- you see government waste, health care fraud. if you took care of the waste, the money spent, that $34 billion on the thing in afghanistan they're never going to use, the waste, that's the money -- that's my money you're spending. now you are going to let these guys enroll in health care and not even ask them, just say, ok, you make this much money, well, sure, that's fine with me, you don't reckon there's going to be any fraud in there? guest: what's going to happen is someone will apply on the internet. they will apply for insurance. they will give their income.

company who you -- you're applying through to the exchange will then verify your income based on last year's income. health and human services is they'll to where access this and if you want to fake your income, you will commit fraud and you may end up in federal prison because that's a violation of both state laws and i know federal law. but there are ways that will be verified. your income will be verified. after you apply for it so they can make sure you're paying the right kind of premium or if you're low income you're going to get subsidies to help buy that insurance policy. that's the beauty of it. host: before we let you go, what do you think about the possibility of some type of result when it comes to student loans? guest: well, again, i'm hoping congress will deal with it. there's no reason why we should

double the interest for student loans. the federal government is making money at 3.4%. you know, why would we do that? the future of our country is there in those colleges right now. so to make it harder for them to finish their four-year degree or even their masters' programs, i think that's not good for our country. host: do you see any type of result before the august recess? guest: i think the senate is working on language. >> you can see "washington journal" anytime at our website, c-span.org. the house is coming back in for procedural votes related to two bills. ution 300. adopting house resolution 300, if ordered. the first electronic vote will be conducted as a a-minute vote. romaining electronic votes will be conducted as five-minute votes. the unfinished business is the vote on ordering the previous

question on house resolution 300 on which the yeas and nays are ordered. the clerk will report the title of the resolution. the clerk: house calendar number had 3, house resolution 3 -- 43, house resolution 300. resolution providing for consideration of the bill h.r. 2668, to delay the application of the individual health insurance mandate, and providing for consideration of the bill h.r. 2667, to delay the application of the employer health insurance mandate, and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on ordering the previous question. members will record their votes y electronic device. this is a 15-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: 230, and the nays are 192. the previous question is ordered. the question is on adoption of the resolution. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. ms. slaughter: mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i request the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. those favoring a vote by the yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is 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: on this vote the yeas are 232. the nays are 183. without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. the resolution is adopted. he house will be in order. he house will be in order. pursuant to house resolution 270, this time has been designated as the taking of the official photo of the house of representatives in session. the house will be in a brief recess while the chamber is being prepared for the photo.

as soon as the photographer indicates that these preparations are complete, the chair will call the house to resume its r to actual session for the taking of the photograph. members will take their cues from the photographer and shortly after the photographer is finished, the house will proceed with its business. pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1, the chair declares the house the chamber is being prepared. "washington jou"

continues. host: we continue with he's a democrat from texas. serves the 29th district. also on the energy and commerce health subcommittee member. shoue individual mandate side? guest: i am a big supporter of the affordable care act. decision.ent made a i would rather have the employer mandate go into effect. but they are managing it. i want to make sure they have everything ready to go. we will not have a state exchange.

we will have a national exchange that people can sign up for. in policies go into effect january. we don't have insurance --i am looking forward for them to have the opportunity to buy insurance. host: here is what he had to say. [video clip] >> lawyer health care prices exploding? wire millions of americans getting kicked out of their plans? the law isn't wonderful, it is a train wreck. and the it, i know it, american people knowt. it is unfair to protect big businesses without giving the same relief to american families and small businesses. host: to his statement at the

end. speaker.appreciate the he is a friend. any program that is rolled out will have glitches. mandate,d the employer the rules were not in place so that will be delayed a year. there has been individual mandates propose throughout the history, sunday proposed by republican members of congress. you cannot get to health-care for eryone unless people take responsibility. if you're an individual and you and youu are required can go through the state or national exchanges. host: what about the fairness argument? guest: if we provide health care

opportunities for everyone in our country, we have to get through these glitcheand figure out how to do it. republicans voted 37 times to repeal the affdable care act. they like to call it obamacare. they lost. it never has passed the senate. this is another way they want to oppose providing an opportunity for health care for all. i would be glad to be on the record today. we voted in 2010 and pass the law. it is not a perfect law. i will like to amend it. there are things in the law we can fix on a bipartisan basis. i am not big on the independent grouto decide what requirements should have. there are a lot of things in

there. they just want to repeal the law. this will give them an opportunity. ho: our guest here to talk about the votes on the affordable care act. ou can ask three que you can see "washington journal" anytime at c-span.org. the house is coming back now after taking the 113th congress photo. members debating two health care bills today. those ker pro tempore: in favor say aye. those opposed, no. mr. polis: a request a recorded vote. the speaker: those in favor of the request for a recorded vote will rise. a sufficient number having risen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a 15-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 10, the nays are 409. the motion is not adopted. the chair will receive a mess act. the messenger: mr. speaker a message from the president of the united states. the secretary: mr. speaker -- mr. secretary. the speaker: -- the speaker: mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: mr. secretary. the secretary: i am directed by the president of the united

states to deliver a message in writing. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan seek recognition? >> pursuant to house resolution 300, i call up the bill h.r. 2667, the authority for mandate delay act and ask for its immediate consideration. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 2667 a bill to ke lay the application of the employer health insurance mandate and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to house resolution 300, the resolution is considered read. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, and the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, will each control 30 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp. mr. camp: i ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative day in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on h.r. 2660. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. camp: i yield myself such

time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. camp: i rise in support of of h.r. 2667 a bill that delays the employer mandate. while it's encouraging to see easing a administration the burden on employers, we must be a nation of laws not blog post which is how the administration announced the delay. while it provides employers some temporary relief from the health care bill, it provides no real relief. even with this delay, families will not get what they were promised, affordable health care. inexplicably, the administration feels only businesses should be exempt. how is that fair? families are already struggling in this obama economy, they're paying more for gas and more for food and wages aren't keeping up with the ever-increasing cost of daily life. don't these hardworking merps deserve the same relief the administration is giving the business community?

house republicans believe it's only fair that families and individuals receive the same treatment. these two bills will ensure that fairness is applied to employers and employees as well as families and individuals. the obama administration claims that they are listening to the american people. senate majority leader harry reid recently said, obamacare has been wonderful. these claims reveal a democratic leadership that is out of touch with reality. when i go back to my district, i hear firsthand from my constituents about concerns with the law. they ask me, why are my premiums skyrocketing? how can i grow my business with all these new mandates, regulations and red tape? why am i losing the insurance i have and like? house republicans share those concerns, and these bills are a positive step forward to protect hardworking taxpayers and businesses from some of the most onerous provisions in the

health care law. the administration's time-out from the law doesn't change the fact that obamacare is unworkable. instead, it's an admission that this law is unworkable. just a few months ago, health and human services secretary kathleen sebelius pledged before the ways and means committee that this law would be ready, on time and without delays. well, now we know the truth. this administration cannot make its own law work. the american people deserve real reforms that actually make health care affordable. during the health care debate, only one bill was scored by the congressional budget office as actually lowering premiums. the house republican alternative to the democrats' health care law. it meant the top health care priority of american families, lowering the cost of health insurance premiums. we should scrap this law and get back to commonsense, step been hi -- step-by-step

reforms. vote to treat american families and individuals the same as businesses. vote yes to codify the delay of the employer mandate and vote yes to delay the individual mandate. thank you, mr. speaker. at this time i ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from texas, mr. brady, control the remainder of the time. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman from texas will control the time. the gentleman from michigan is recognized. mr. levin: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. levin: well, here we go again. another repeal vote, another political side show and another blow, another blow to bipartisanship which is so vital to addressing a whole host of important issues, including an issue important to our committee tax reform. instead of moving forward, once again my republican colleagues are looking backwards.

the fact is that the president has taken an action that my republican colleagues support. the administration determined that a delay of employer responsibility requirements was necessary in order to ensure effective implementation of the tax code. so it exercised its authority. long-standing administrative relief used by administrations of both parties for many years to grant transition relief. the republican response, the republicans cannot leave well enough alone. they insist on maneuvering for political purposes. despite duplicative legislation for purely political reasons that will go nowhere in the 38th and sets up their vote to repeal the affordable care act. after the announcement, my

colleague, chairman camp, in a new populous flourish, and i yote, the obama administration's decision -- and i quote, the obama administration's decision to give corporate america a free pass while continuing to force average everyday americans to abide by the law is deeply disturbing. d the majority leader, mr. cantor, with hyper populism said, and i quote, the president came down on the side of big business but left the american people out in the cold, end of quotes. out in the cold? republican hypocrisy is reaching new heights. under the affordable care act, tens of millions of americans will gain previously unavailable access to affordable health insurance. to date, and i emphasize this, more than six million young adults have health insurance through their parents' plans.

six million seniors have saved $6.1 billion on prescription drugs. and 105 million americans have ceived free preventative services. and in state to state, americans buying insurance within the new marketplaces will have access to coverage for less than they pay today. new yorkers, for one, learned today that on average individual premiums within the marketplace will be half what they are today. they certainly do not feel left out in the cold. competition under a.c.a. is working, and the republicans call it socialism. the market reforms from the health law work together to eliminate the ability of insurance companies to discriminate on the basis of

pre-existing conditions and gender, but the system will only work, will only work and remain affordable if everyone has insurance and the law provides the reforms and assistance to put affordable coverage within reach for everyone. without the shared responsibility, the law will not work and insurance premiums will skyrocket. 129 million people with pre-existing conditions will once gren -- again, once again be priced or forced out of coverage and we will be back here we started. republicans know this. why? because the individual mandate was a republican idea.

a republican idea. going all the way back to the 1980's when the conservative heritage foundation originated the idea. its supporters have argued, and i quote, all citizens should be required to obtain a basic level of health insurance. not having health insurance imposes a risk of delaying medical care. it also may impose costs on others because we as a society provide care to the uninsured. the risk, it continues, of shifts costs to others have led many states to mandate that all drivers have liability insurance. the same logic applies to health insurance, end of quotes. but republicans are not here today to act logically or take responsibility.

they have never, never, never had a comprehensive health care reform plan. instead, their only goal is to score political points. so we urge, vote no on both bills. i reserve the balance of my ime and i ask if mr. mcdermott while i'm not here reserve our time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. brady: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. brady: mr. speaker, this is just about fairness. with families and workers in my district is asking is this, isn't it fair to grant businesses relief from this big government mandate but still force average workers to comply with it? the president's health care law isn't ready for business, how is it ready for my family, for my children, for my loved ones? it's hard for both families and workers wondering, why isn't

the white house listening to us . this isn't fair. the president's proclaimed the law is working the way it's supposed to. the white house and treasury department, every agency tells us things are right on track, but they're not. they missed deadline after deadline after deadline in this troubling implementation. the truth is it's not ready, and with the temporary relief from the business mandate, yes, it was welcomed news but it didn't solve the problems our local businesses are struggling with under obamacare. in fact, the president's health care law is causing more confusion and more uncertainty. workers are seeing fewer hours and smaller paychecks. that's not fair. businesses are struggling to find the money to pay for higher health care costs under obamacare. that's not fair. our neighbors are struggling to find full-time jobs. 20 million americans can't find them. it's fewer jobs to apply for. that's not fair. you know, why is it that under

this white house warren buffett gets a break from obamacare but joe six pack, the single mom working at the local restaurant, they don't get any kind of break? we just want fairness for workers, fairness for families, we're tired of the white house picking winners and losers. this is about fairness and equality. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. without objection, the gentleman from washington will control the time of the gentleman from michigan. the gentleman from washington is recognized. mr. mcdermott: mr. speaker, i yield two minutes to the gentleman from new york, mr. rangel. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. rangel: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. rangel: i've been here over four decades and have never seen legislation just completely be ignored. i'm thoroughly convinced that the republican majority are not the least bit concerned about

health care because if they were they would have a health care plan. the whole idea of talking about repealing obamacare, not having a substitute for it, means that the president could talk about education, he could talk about jobs, he could talk about anything but they plan, their legislative plan is just to say no. just to say no to the president no matter what he comes up with en if it adds to the economy of our great country or even if it affects the security of our great country. i am convinced, as i said this morning, that if the president actually walked on water that the first thing the republicans will say is that president obama can't swim. and so i think that we had enough of this politics 30, 40 times we're talking about repealing it. are you against having preconditions be accepted for health insurance? are you against kids being able to stay on the policy of their

parents until they're 26? are you against having preventive care given to people? i hope you're not because soon and very soon the american people are going to get fed up with this gridlock politics. so i hope the spiritual leaders who are concerned about the health care and the aging and i hope the business community will see if you want to have economic growth you got to get to congress and you got to get government involved. it's not a question of laying on people. it's a question of economic growth which means our infrastructure has to be invested in, we have to be competitive and we have to do the right thing, not by republicans and democrats but to all of our people. we can't afford to have a day when a person needs health care that someone's going to ask whether you're a republican or whether you are democrat. it's abundantly care the president is for full health

insurance. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from washington reserves. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? mr. brady: i yield one minute to the chairman of the budget committee, a father of three children who understands how tough it is to make ends meet for health care, two minutes to the gentleman from wisconsin. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. ryan: i thank you, madam chair. madam speaker, here's what we're doing. the president himself is saying that this employer mandate isn't ready, it can't work and therefore he's delaying it. here's the point. in our constitution it is congress that writes the laws and the president that executes the laws. he doesn't get to choose which laws he wants to enforce selectively. we agree with him on the mandate. that's why the first of these bills says ok, let's delay that and here's congress acting to do that because that's congress' job, not the administration's job. but while we're doing this, we have to ask this other question, if the fortune 500 companies come to the white house and say, this mandate is

onerous, it's not ready, millions of people are going to lose their health insurance, it's going to be a repudeiation of your promise if you like what you got you can keep it, delay this. great. what about the families and small businesses that are going to have the same kind of mandate? and that's the second vote we're going to have. if it's good for big business, if this is onerous for them, if the white house admits it won't ork for them, then why are they complicit sticking the same kind of enforcement, not ready for primetime mandate on small business pham lease, on small businesses? -- on families, on small businesses? this bill is unraveling before us. what's going to happen at the end of the day, if you can't verify a person's health insurance, when a person attests to whatever their income is, you are going to have a lot of people at the end of the year get all these subsidies that they weren't supposed to get, either by confusion, by waste, even by fraud, and the i.r.s. is going

to come in with one really big tax bill on families in a year's time and that will be a massive rude awakening. this law -- this law is imploding this law is unnecessary, this law will cause millions of people to lose the health insurance they have that they want to keep. not only delay this mandate derek lay the other mandate so we can fix this once and for all. with that, i yield. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from washington is recognized. mr. mcdermott: madam speaker, we're back in the at ther of the absurd. what we're hearing now is the sound of republican heart rates going up osm because macare is coming. these last benefits are going to happen, like it or not, and worse, they're going to work. and we're seing the time-honored political tactic of confusion. the slight of hand.

direct people's attention over here so they don't see what you're doing over there. shout about delaying the employer mandate ancon fuse the people when the more co-rosive bill comes next. the tool that makes reform possible, the individual mandate. maybe they're so scared because it's already working. washington, oregon, california are already reporting lower rates in 2014 and today new york premiums were cut by 50%. sick children are getting covered, consumers are getting reimbursements from insurers, there is no evidence of the sticker shock you will hear about. the promise we made americans are being fulfill and republicans are seeing giant election map slowly losing red blocks. this bill isn't about employers. it's a frenetic expression of their anxiety over the

president's signature legislation working. i thought 38 times trying to repeal it would be enough but apparently not. we've got to try one more time. you haven't learned it isn't going to work you know why there's no fuss in this town about these bills because the insurance company knows it's all nonsense. they know it won't work without an individual mandate and you will not get it repealed. we ought to get on wit and vote no on this bill. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from washington reserve the gentleman from texas is recognized. pll brady: i'd like to yield to dr. boustany of louisiana. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. boustany: obamacare is massively flawed, that's why it needs to be repealed an replaced. now some very smart administration lawyers have come to the conclusion that the

employer mandate is too complex and won't work. it's clear to me and others across america that it's going to cause hourly workers across america to see a drop in the number of hours they're going to work and will force employers to hole off on hiring. it should be fully repeal. that's why i addressed h.r. 903, to fully repeal it. until we can do that, i will surely and gladly vote for this delay. is time when our economy showing sluggish growth with high unemployment, record unemployment, businesses across this country face uncertainty. frankly, i will say this is about fairness. getting rid of this employer mandate if we delay or repeal it, it's about fairness to hardworking small business owners who are struggling every day. it's about hardworking workers who hope to keep their jobs or hope not to be reduced in their hours. i yield back. thank you.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas reserves. the gentleman from -- the gentleman from texas. mr. brady: i ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from georgia, dr. price, control the remainder of the time for us. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman from georgia will control the rest of the time. the gentleman from washington. mr. mcdermott: i ask unanimous consent to submit for the record a record which shows that hundreds of thousands of constituents in the first district of wisconsin and the eighth district of texas would benefit from the affordable care act. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. mcdermott: i yield two inutes to the gentleman from oregon, mr. blumenauer. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. blumenauer: this is the latest chapt for the a long-running process of deliberately trying to sabotage health care reform. this -- the delay of the employer mandate for 5% of american businesses that employ only 1% of mesh workers is not

earth shattering, not entirely unforeseen but more to the point given a concerted effort by my republican friends to dismantle health care reform you would think they would embrace it. it is being attacked instead because there is no interest by my republican friends in comprehensive approach to making health care work better. they have no plan. this is simply a tactic to gain political advantage by fanning flames of discontent. they want to take credit, actually, for many of the features of obamacare that are public but they have no intention of either paying for hem or providing a framework of comprehensive reform so it will work osm because macare is working where it's allowed to work. in oregon, we are seeing improvements in health care coverage, reduction in health insurance premiums and we are on track to save tax dollars improving the quality of

health care. if everybody practiced medicine the way it's being practiced in metropolitan portland, people would get sick less often, they'd get well faster, they'd live longer and there would be no medicare funding crisis. nstead of working to fine tune the reform, which embodies many of the principles that have been advanced, embraced and implemented by republican governors not just mitt romney, they've chosen instead to make it fail. it's another illustration of a party without ideas. opposing comprehensive immigration reform, imposing agricultural reform, house republicans won't even allow a conference committee to be appoint sod that we can have a budget agreed to. and while putting sand in the gears at every turn for efforts to get more value out of the health care system, it's not just sad and unfortunate, it's shameful. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentleman from washington reserves. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. price: i'm pleased to yield two minutes to the chame of the energy and commerce committee, the gentleman, mr. upton. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. upton: two weeks ago as americans were gathering with loved ones to celebrate our nation's independence a treasury bureaucrat quietly posed a law detailing a major policy shift in the administration's signature health care law. the delay of the employer mandate. while it appeared to be a sudden turnabout, we learn the administration made the decision in june and it was considered in a very careful way for a while. this is a direct contradiction to previous testimony before congress. every single time we had -- we asked the administration witness if implementation was on trashing they looked us in the eye and said absolutely, yes. why did the most transparent administration in history mislead congress and try to

dupe the public? because it knew that the law is bad for business and bad for jobs. today, we give the administration authority in full view of the american public to delay the employer mandate for a year. and the house will stand up for the millions of young adults, working family, and older americans who cannot afford the health care law's looming rate shock. fair is fair. if businesses aren't subject to the same burdens and penalties urn the health care law next year, average americans shouldn't face them either. many middle class families are going to pay dramatically higher premiums as a result of the affordable care act. the energy and commerce committee surveyed 17 of the nation's leading insurers and found many consumers in the individual market could see their premiums nearly double with potential highs eclipsing 400%. the broken promises are many. missed deadlines and delays have become routine. the law is so off the rails that the administration is now

disregarding entire sections of the statute this debate is about jobs and it's about fairness. we continue to believe a perm nept delay of these damaging policies is the best course of action. for today, let's join together and protect americans for at least another year system of i ask my colleagues to support h. form 2667 and 2668 so we can delay and dismantle these policies that will hurt american jobs. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia reserves. the gentleman from washington. without objection, the gentleman from michigan will control the rest of the time. the gentleman from michigan is recognized. mr. levin: we'll be doing this off and on. i yield myself 30 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. levin: i want to put in the facts on the sixth district where my friend, mr. upton, comes from, the sixth district of michigan. 6,00 young adults in the district now have health

insurance through their parents' plan. 9,100 seniors who receive prescription drug discouldn'ts, 131,000 in the district seniors are now eligible for preventive services with without paying. 197,000 individuals now have health insurance that covers preventive services. up to 41,000 children in the district with pre-existing health conditions can no longer be denied coverage by health insurers. i now yield two minutes to the gentleman from wisconsin. a member of our committee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from wisconsin is ecognized for two minutes. >> thank you, madam speaker. i rise today to say as the bills are nonsense and completely up necessary. one is doing what the obama

administration said they would do, to delay reporting requirements because of feedback they got from businesses large and small and sorks that said in the that they can't do it but they need more time. mr. kind: the other would do away with the responsibility component. the real story today, madam speaker is not what's happening on the house floor or the votes these two bills are going to get. it was what announcement came out of the state of new york and reported in the "new york times." health plan costs for new yorkers set to fall by 50%. this is with the creation of the health insurance exchanges. individual policy rates are going to be about 50% less than what individuals are currently paying today. because the exchanges are doing what they were meant to do. this increased competition and transparency. making it more affordable for uninsured americans to go out and obtain affordable coverage. my father gave me some pretty good advice early on in my age, he said, son, you're going to encounter two forms of critics

in your life, one who criticized you because they want to see you fail and the other is going to criticize you because they want to see you succeed. being able to differentiate between the two will be the secret to being successful in life. that's been the problem with the affordable care act from the beginning. we have a major political party who doesn't want to see it succeed. they're doing everything they can to undermine it even if it brings increased pain and difficulty to businesses large and small. today's demonstration with these two wills reaffirms that proposition. i encourage my colleagues to vote no. i yield back the remainder of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. price: i'm pleased to yield a minute and a half to a pivotal member of the ways and means committee, mr. reichert. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for a minute and a half. mr. reichert: i thank you, madam speaker. i thank the gentleman. two weeks ago, the administration announced a delay of a crucial piece of

obamacare, the employer mandate. why? because they were petitioned by businesses from across this great nation of ours to do that. and why did they petition the white house to waive the employer mandate? because they recognize, madam chair that this was a burdensome law on their business. that this was a tax burden that they couldn't bear. that this would slow their businesses, slow hiring, and slow growth. they recognized that. my constituents in washington state recognized that. even the president's biggest allies, labor unions, agree. they've warned that obamacare will, quote, destroy the health and well being of hardworking americans, end quote. but madam speaker, this legislation also recognizes another dangerous precedent. that this administration is setting. this legislation will delay the employer mandate for one year.

so that the law is in line with decided to sident do. this is not how our government should work. but that's how this president operates. we've seen this from him time and time again. a problem with the health care law, let's just delay it. welfare to work requirements? i'll just waive those. a change in unemployment insurance plaws -- laws? i don't have to implement that. i know about enforcing laws. i was cop for 33 years. you don't pick and choose. you enforce the law. that's what this president should do. and we're making a law in line with what the president wants. i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia reserves, the gentleman from michigan is recognize. . mr. levin: i yield mr. levin: i want to review the gentleman's districts. s have insurance.

100,000 seniors are now eligible for medicare preventive services without paying any co-pays, co-insurance or deductible. 209,000 individuals now have health insurance that cover preventative services without pay. up to 42,000 children in the district with pre-existing condition health conditions can no longer be denied coverage by health insurers. that's what a.c.a. is doing. it's now my privilege to yield two minutes to another distinguished gentleman of our committee, mr. crowley. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. crowley: i thank my friend for yielding me the time. here we are once again wasting our constituents' time by voting on the exact same action the administration has already taken. apparently we must yet again dismantle important parts of the affordable care act. we keep hearing these votes are necessary because of the quote,

burden, unquote, that's out there for individuals and their families. let me tell you about what i worry about in terms of burdens for my constituents. the burden of a young worker knowing that she's stuck in a job that's bad for her but she keeps it because it's the only place where she can get health insurance. the burden of a father trying desperately to find insurance plans that will cover his son even though his son has diabetes. the burden of a mother living in constant fear that her family could lose their home because without insurance one unexpected medical episode could lead to bankruptcy. we're leaving those burdens is why i support the affordable care act. and i don't understand why my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are so eager to tear that down. later today we'll be voting on whether to undermine one of the key pieces of the law that is responsible for actually making coverage more affordable. in fact, just this morning, as ron kind mentioned earlier, it was announced that in my state of new york these very provisions are cutting the cost of a family to buy their own

insurance by half, by over 50%. i know that was a difficult article for you all to read this morning, but instead of applauding this critical relief families, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle plan to attack the parts of the very law that made that possible in the first place. i've even heard reports that some opponents of the law are urging people to burn their so-called obamacare cards and not buy insurance in protest. i would want to point out to my colleagues there's no such thing as an obamacare card, so be careful not to burn your fingers when you're using your imaginary prop. but i just don't understand why they wouldn't want their constituents to have access to affordable, quality insurance that these people currently can't get now. please do not vote for these bills. they undermine the spirit of this country. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan reserves. the gentleman from georgia is

recognized. mr. price: thank you, madam speaker. i'm pleased to yield to the gentleman from illinois, a member of the ways and means committee, mr. roskam. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. roskam: let's talk about burdens. the burden of listening to the president of the united states, madam speaker, on june 7 of this year say this bill is working the way it's supposed to. no, it's not. then, within the twinkling of an eye the white house has to say, oh, it's not working the way it's supposed to. we need to have this delayed for a year. let's talk about the burden of signing a tax reform -- a tax return form under penalties of perjury and all of that burden that presses down with the force of the law when you make a misrepresentation and you're trying to follow-up on 200 pages of an individual mandate and people don't know if they're a foot or horse back on this thing, that's a burden. that's a burden that the country can't sustain and that's the burden that we can relieve by voting aye.

i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia reserves. the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: i yield myself 30 seconds. the application, mr. roskam, is three pages. let me also mention what's in play in your district, why a.c.a. matters. 5,200 young adults have insurance through their parents. 7,800 seniors have discounts for prescription drugs. 87,000 seniors now eligible for preventive services without paying. 243,000 individuals now have health insurance covering preventive services without these pays. 234,000 individuals are -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. levin: i yield myself an additional 15 seconds. will the gentleman yield since he's using my name in debate? mr. levin: no, i don't. due to a.c.a. provisions, the

preventing insurance companies from spending 20% of their 35,000 now individuals have insurance they cannot place lifetime limits on their coverage. so when you pick up a book with hundreds of pages, tell your constituents what it means for them. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. levin: i now am privileged to yield two minutes to the gentleman from energy and commerce who's played such a decisive role in the reform of health care, mr. pallone. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized for two minutes. mr. pallone: thank you, madam speaker. i have to say i'm so sick and tired of the time that the house republicans continue to waste on their anti-obamacare message. repeal, defund, obstruct, you pick the tactic. well, our country has some pressing issues we should be addressing here today like rising student loan rates, immigration reform, budget issues or a jobs bill. yet, the republicans insist on focus on politicizing this health care fight over and over again. obamacare is here to stay.

let's face it. if you have to make some improvements after some point it's fully implemented, we'll look at them. but not now before it's taking place. let me talk about this individual mandate. the requirement that individuals obtain coverage is the most critical part of the law. in order for our health care system to operate in a sustainable and cost-effective way, we have to get americans covered. so the insurance marketplace must include both sick and healthy individuals in order to ensure that the system is sustainable. repealing the individual responsibility provision will only raise health insurance premiums and increase the number of uninsured americans. that's why that new york state report says premiums for those in the individual market have gone down 50%, because you do have the individual requirement now and everybody's sick and healthy is part of a much larger pool. now, this other issue of the employer reporting requirements, that's already been delayed by the administration. it's a done deal. nothing here in the house is going to change that.

the effect of that is minimal because the vast majority of employers, they already provide health coverage. i think less than 4% do not. if someone is not covered, they can go into the exchange and they can probably qualify for tax credits and get affordable coverage. s mr. levin has said, this already has had a major impact of providing health coverage for individuals, whether they're children, students, seniors, families, small business owners, so many have gotten affordable coverage. once this kicks in in october, you can go in the exchange and by next year the vast majority, almost every american will have affordable coverage with good benefits and what they pay will not be based on pre-existing conditions, leave it alone. this is the law and it's a good law. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan reserves. the gentleman from georgia. mr. price: thank you, madam speaker. how much time remains for each side? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia has 17 1/2 minutes remaining. the gentleman from michigan has 10 3/4 minutes remaining.

mr. price: thank you, madam speaker. i'm pleased to yield two minutes to the author of 2667, a the gentleman who recognizes where the authority ought to come from from this piece of legislation, the gentleman from arkansas, mr. griffin. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from arkansas is recognized for two minutes. mr. griffin: thank you, madam speaker. the employer mandate provisions in the affordable care act are already stifling job growth. we don't have to wait to see what's going to happen. in my district i was approached by a 21-year-old hispanic american, he contacted me, he said, i'm a franchise owner, i'm the vice president of a small franchise that i inherited from my mother. and he said his business has grown about 25% each year over the past two years and he's one of the top franchises in his group. he's a rising senior in college managing a small business. he said he currently has 45 employees and according to him

right now would be the perfect time to add another 10 or 20 full time, good-paying jobs, but -- but this is a small business owner. he said he can't do it because of the employer mandate. it makes him choose between increasingly expensive insurance premiums or punitive tax penalties for each employee. he contacted me for relief. if this mandate could not be repealed, he said, could you please make the 50 threshold 250 so as not to strangle his business? the 21-year-old said it best, "the government should be my partner so i can help my employees prosper. i can help them more than the government, but i'm literally not able because of taxes, the ffordable care act and other

regulations." after three years the president has finally realized that the employer mandate is a bad idea. it's already costing jobs and lowering wages for millions of hardworking americans, americans who were forced to be part of obamacare deserve more than to be governed by a blog post from the treasury department. only congress can change the law. personally, i want to repeal and replace the law, but today we can join the president and vote for my bill. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia reserves. the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: i yield myself 45 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. levin: i'd just like to ask the gentleman from arkansas if the small business person he mentioned has any health coverage for his employees. do is to need to continue this law and its implementation so that those employees will have some health insurance. and in his district, because of

a.c.a., 9,500 young adults have insurance through their parents. 3,400 seniors have received prescription drug discounts. 125,000 seniors are now eligible for preventative services without paying co-pays, etc., etc. i ask that this be entered into the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. levin: it's now my pleasure to yield two minutes to the ranking member on small business who has worked so hard on health care reform with sensitivity to the small businesses of this country, ms. velazquez from new york. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from new york is recognized for two minutes. ms. velazquez: thank you and i thank the gentleman for yielding. i rise in opposition to this legs. the american people are -- i rise in opposition to this legislation. the american people are tired of political gimmicks and games. they want to see real efforts to grow jobs and our economy. this legislation does nothing

to advance these goals. the president has already taken steps to alleviate the burden on small businesses by delaying the employer mandate. this step will ensure small firms have the time, resources and tools they need to provide coverage to their employees before the mandate kicks in. at best the legislation before us today is duplicative of that effort. at worst it amounts to political grandstanding. let's be absolutely clear. even if these measures pass the house, we know they'll go nowhere in the senate. if in some distorted reality the senate somehow approved this reality, it would not be signed into law by the president. so the only real purpose of this bill and debate is to score cheap political games. passing this bill will do nothing tore help americans who

are struggling to -- nothing to help americans who are struggling to put groceries on the table. but bringing up yet another bill to repeal health care 38th bill this congress, i forgot it's summer so we're showing reruns. the affordable care act is already providing valuable benefits to the american people. it was just reported today that new yorkers will see a 50% cut in their insurance premiums thanks to this landmark law. millions of young adults who are graduating from college can remain on their parents' plans as they enter the job market. children with life-threatening illness are no longer denied coverage under pre-existing conditions rules. more are no longer paying due to the discriminatory insurance practices. these are the benefits that our republicans colleagues will deny the american people --

republican colleagues will deny the american people. vote no. this debate is over. thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan reserves. the gentleman from georgia. mr. price: i'm pleased to yield one minute to the chairman of the oversight subcommittee on energy and commerce, the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. murphy. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized one. mr. murphy: thank you. right before the fourth of july, the administration admitted the affordable care act was ready. as we just heard from the other side of the aisle, the bill is a burden. and so they waived the mandate tax for employers but not the american people. the white house says remain calm, all is well, but there's many signs the law is not ready. the small business health insurance exchange delayed. and states that don't expand medicaid, we are going to delay the mandate for some. for some insurance rates, they'll rise 90% to 400%. if you want to call for you ies, they tell us, don't have to tell the truth on your paperwork because no one is going to check. don't force americans to be taxed on something they don't want and is not ready. they told us we had to pass the

bill in order to find out what's in it and now they're telling americans, you have to buy the policy to find out what's in it or else be taxed. be fair, delay the mandate tax for employers and the american people. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan is recognized. mr. levin: could you tell us the time remains? the speaker pro tempore: you have eight minutes remape, 14 minutes on the other side. mr. levin: i ask unanimous consent to place in the record the benefits of health care reform in the 18th district of pennsylvania. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. relevin: i yield one minute to the gentleman from new york, mr. meeks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. i tell my colleagues on the other side it's time to stop chasing the ghost. 38, 39 times and trying to repeal obamacare, give up

chasing the ghost. i also tell my friends, stop being confused by the facts. the facts are,s as "the new york times" indicated today in new york, that the cost of health care insurance, because of the affordable care act, will go down 50%. the fact is, as mr. levin has indicated time after time that preventive care for all americans, the fact is you will not be discriminated against because you're a woman. the fact is the american people want affordable care act. how do i know? they re-elected president obama again understanding that president obama stood for health care for all americans and bringing down the cost of health care in america. that's what this is about. 38 times, give up the ghost, chasing the ghost.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan reserves. the gentleman from georgia. mr. price: i'm pleased to yield two minutes to the chair of the health subcommittee on energy and commerce, the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. pitts. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. pitts: i rise in support of delaying both employer and individual mandates. according to a new gallup poll, four in 10 uninsured americans don't even realize they'll be subject to fines under the affordable care act. they're about to find out that they are required to purchase insurance that is now even more expensive than it was in the past. in california, one of the few states to release detailed data about the cost of obamacare coverage, costs will double for many residents. researchers compared the cost of health plans on the new exchanges with what's currently available in the market in the state, and astoppishingly they

found current health plans cost significantlyless than comparable plans sold on the exchanges come october 1. in other words, some people will be pay manager for the same thing because of the new complexity ofally supported exchanges. vinow als will be eligible for subsities but many will get no help at all. in fact, they'll be paying more to support the subsidies. they'll just have to watch their take-home pay get smaller. the sad mrgs heard from business owners about the chaos being caused by the law. some employers laying off employees, some employers shifting to part-time employees, some employers deciding not to expand their businesses and many employees who can't get a job. employees losing their health insurance, losing benefits, losing income, trying to find another part-time job just to survive. so they panic, unlawfully delaying the employer mandate. it's deeply unfair to subject

individuals mandate they can neither comp rehence nor afford. today we're fighting for fairness but we'll continue the fight to complely stop this train wreck before it fenally wrecks family budgets, health care, and our economy. i'll yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia reserves. the gentleman from michigan is recognized. mr. levin: i yield one minute to the gentleman from georgia, mr. barro. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. barrow: i thank the gentleman for the time. i rise in support of the legislation before us to delay the employer and individual mandates in the affordable care act. these burdensome provisions are a drag on our economy and hurt the job creators in georgia and across the country. studies have shown the employer mandate could cost the economy an estimated 3.2 million jobs. on top of that, businesses have indicated this mandate will cause them to reduce the size of businesses or worse, close their doors. in an economy as fragile as our, that's the exact opposite

what we want. today's vote is a step in the right direction but we can go further. i'm leading the effort in the house with two of my colleagues to repeal the employer mandate. if repeal and replace is is the twhoifl majority, i urge my colleagues to support today's legislation and quickly bring up a full repeal. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. price: i'm pleased to yield one minute to the gentleman from florida, mr. bilirakis. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. bilirakis: last week, the administration announced it would delay the employer mandate under obamacare. even the though administration doesn't have the authority to do this, it's a sign that even authors are realizing the law is unworkable. under obamacare, americans' premiums are skyrocketing and employers are being forced to cut jobs, hours, and wages. individuals, families, and businesses all deserve relief from this bad law.

this is about fairness, fairness for both hardworking taxpayers and american businesses. while i have long oppose odd because macare and believe the best solution is full repeal and replacement of the law, we must pass the authority for mandate delay act to provide great earn certainty to all americans. thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from georgia reserves. the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: i ask unanimous consent to place in the record a document showing the benefits of heather reform in the 12th district of florida. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. levin: it's my pleasure to yield to the gentleman from connecticut, mr. lar son, two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. larson: i'm here today because i want to thank my colleagues on the other side of the aisle for their embrace of obamacare.

after 38 attempts to repeal it, however least the gludgingly, an acceptance and understanding of the importance an significance of this very important care. now, whether this embrace is the kiss of judas as some may say or some may say this is just merely a charade. i commend them for understanding that medicare isn't an entitlement. after all, it's the insurance that people have paid for. every american knows this because all of the do is go to their pay stub to check it out system of we thank our colleagues for this embrace of this very important issue. i thank them because i see an opportunity here. i see an opportunity to bring forth the best of public health. the best of science and innovation and technology. the best of entrepreneurialism.

kind of like what the heritage foundation came up with and that our republican governor piloted in a democratic state which is what we now today call the affordable health care act. there are studies that suggest $ 7 -- over e over $700 billion to $00 billion annually in waste and abuse. thanks for the embrace today and the understanding that if we do this we cannot only pay down the -- we can not only pay down the national debt, we can prvide an opportunity for our citizens to make sure they live dignity by ves in having the most important program for their retirement, medicare, there for the future. i thank my colleagues. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from connecticut yields back. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. price: i'm pleased to yield one behalf nips to the vice chairman of the energy and

commerce committee, the gentlelady from tennessee, mrs. blackburn. the speaker: the gentlelady is recognized for one and a half minutes. mrs. blackburn: i thank the chairman for the recognition. i'm rising to support the legislation in front of us. i have to tell you, my constituents are wanting to know when did the president decide he could pick and choose what laws he's going to enforce and what laws he's going to waive? other the course of three days this administration decided they were just going to waive and rewrite this law and it took them three years to try to implement it. i think what we're seing is they're finally admitting this is a train correct tissue train wreck and it is not ready for prime time. however it is not fair that the president is choosing to protect big business from obamacare but not hardworking american taxpayers, individuals, families, it is also eerily similar to the closed door manner in which the law was written and pass and

now that people are reading it, they're finding out what is in it. this legislation before us today would delay the requirements that nearly all americans purchase minimum essential health insurance coverage or pay a tax penalty until 2015. the delay of the individual mandate is needed due to the administrative delay of the employer mandate my constituents overwhelmingly oppose this law and i work each and every day to stop the harmful effects it's having on american families an businesses and to continue the fight for solutions to spur economic growth, create new jobs and provide a more secure future for all americans. i encourage support of the legislation and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. the gentleman from georgia reserves. the chair would like to remind the members that the gentleman from michigan has four mins remain, the gentleman from georgia has 10. the gentleman from michigan is

recognized. mr. levin: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan reserves. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. thank you, mr. speaker. i'm pleased to yield one minute to the gentleman from ohio, mr. rene see, a member of the ways and means committee. mr. renacci: i rise in support of both the -- both of these bills. costs in my district are expected to increase 38%. leaving taxpayers on the hook for those tax hikes. now they've decided to waive only the employer mandate while leaving the individual mandate intact. that's blatantly unfair to my constituents and all americans. why does the administration suddenly find it acceptable to give big companies a better deal han the average ohioan?

come january 1, individuals could still face stiff penalties if they don't carry insurance. insurance their employer may decide they will no longer provide. with these two bills, we can provide individuals the same opportunity the administration is giving businesses by a allowing them to opt out of obamacare next year too. i ask my colleagues to come together and pass this legislation. the people we represent are depending on it. thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yield back. the gentleman from georgia reserves. the gentleman from michigan is recognized. mr. levin: i ask unanimous consent that a document showing benefits of the health care reform law in the 16th district of ohio be placed in the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. levin: i would like to yield to mr. waxman the balance of our time on this bill and k that the time on 2668 be managed by mr. mcdermott. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. levin: how much time is there? the speaker pro tempore: the

gentleman from california will be rex niced for four minutes, the balance of me time. mr. levin: it's my pleasure to yield the balance of our time on this bill to the ranking member of energy and commerce, one of the co-authors of health care reform after so many years of efforts. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. waxman: mr. speaker, the affordable care act is the law of the land. the republicans never liked it. they didn't want to support it. and they did everything they could to try to stop it. they thought the courts woult throw it out, they didn't. they thought president obama would be defeated, he was re-elect. either my republican colleagues don't know or are willfully ignoring the benefit this is law provides to their constituents. i want to tell them and anybody watching this debate that if they would go to the website

for the democrats on the energy nd commerce committee which is democrats.energyandcommerce.hou se.gov, weave district by district impact of the law. i urge my colleagues to actually take a look at the benefits. they are so eager -- to take a look at the benefits they are so eager to take away from their constituents. what are these benefits? people will not be denied health insurance because of pre-existing conditions. the insurance companies will not be able to put lifetime caps or go in and try to take away insurance when they get sick. the -- all the abuses by the insurance companies will be stopped. and then people will be able to buy insurance in a marketplace where they can choose between different private insurance plans. and if some are low income they'll get some help. but everybody is going to see an opportunity they've never

had before because every insurance plan will have a minimum benefit package. . 7,500 adults are already getting insurance by being able to stay on their parents' plan up to age 26. 12,000 seniors in my district alone are getting prescription drug discounts under medicare and there are millions around the country that will benefit from that. people, whether on medicare, medical, medicaid, private insurance, will not be asked to make co-payments for prevention, preventtive care will be emphasized -- preventive care will be emphasized so so we can try to prevent diseases rather than pay for them to be treated. people will get money back if their insurance companies are not spending no more than 20% on their overhead. we've had private insurance companies spending 30% and 40% on their salaries for their

executives. and less on the actual benefits. every insurance plan will have to provide 80% of the premiums that go for the insurance coverage for health care services. this is an important bill. now, if you take away the individual requirement to get insurance -- the people that are going to get insurance for sure are the people that are already sick. if you don't have full participation you can't spread the cost out to make it all affordable. the republicans would like to take away the requirement that everybody get insurance so that of the have a failure law because pre-existing -- people with pre-existing conditions will be put into their own category and the insurance will be just too much for them to afford. they're trying to undermine the whole law. the president does not need

legal authority to pull off -- put off for a year the requirement that employers of 50 employees or more cover their employees or pay into the system. most of those employers already cover their employees. 95% of those employers already cover their employees and we hope to give tax breaks to others so that they will join in and be able to cover their employees. this is a bill that's going to benefit all americans. republicans oppose medicare, they oppose obamacare, they don't want people to get fair treatment with their health insurance. vote no on both bills today. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. price: thank you, mr. speaker. i'm pleased now to yield one minute to the gentleman from iowa, mr. king. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from iowa is recognized for one minute. mr. king: thank you, mr. speaker. i thank the gentleman from georgia for yielding. and for leading this. mr. speaker, i despise obamacare. just about everybody in america knows that. i think it should be ripped out

by the roots. the minority of the supreme court, the clear-thinking constitutionalists, though, agree with me. the gentleman from california says that, however, that obamacare is the law of the land. i'm going to agree with that for this argument. the law of the land. the law of the land is the constitution, it's the supreme law of the land and article two, section three says the president shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed. the president of the united states decided he's going to write his own law and waive the language that's clear statute in the bill that carries his name, obamacare, and his signature. it's appalling to me that the president could have such contempt for the constitution and that this congress would seek to conform to the president's whim. first scott ring gareth's resolution that declares and rejects this idea, this unconstitutional act of legislating from the executive branch of government, and i would point out now the height

of audacity is the president's veto threat for us to be conforming with his unconstitutional act. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. members are reminded to refrain from improper revenses to the president -- references to the president. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. price: thank you, mr. speaker. how much time remains on our side? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia has eight minutes. mr. price: am i correct that the other side is out of time? the speaker pro tempore: that is correct. mr. price: thank you, mr. speaker. i'm pleased to yield one minute to the gentleman from michigan, mr. walberg. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan is recognized for one minute. mr. walberg: thank you, mr. speaker. i thank my colleague from georgia. mr. speaker, this must come as a shock to the administration and democrat senate leadership who have leentry described obamacares a -- who have recently described obamacare as wonderful for our country. but not so much for us in the house and the american people. today employers are cutting jobs, hours and wages because they won't be able to comply with the law. individuals are seeing premiums climb and families are losing health insurance they like.

an administrative train wreck has become so likely that on july 2 the president announced a year delay for the employer mandate in his own law. this eadvocates a question for the president -- eadvocates a question for the president -- evokes a question for the president, shouldn't the same relief be given to the american people? i rise in support of today's legislation, to delay both the employer and individual mandate. all only fair that taxpayers, whether businesses or families, receive relief from these hurtful mandates. i look forward to continuing to work with my colleagues to revive our economy, create jobs and put america first. so they can make their own health care decisions. and by the way, wouldn't it be great if personal responsibility, creativity and liberty reigned again in america? i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. price: thank you, mr. speaker. i'm pleased now to yield two minutes to the gentlelady from kansas, a member of the ways and

means committee, ms. jenkins. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from can -- the gentlelady from kansas is recognized for two minutes. ms. jenkins: i thank the gentleman for yielding and his leadership on this very important issue. and i'm pleased president obama acknowledged how damaging the employer mandate will be to american businesses. i agree, delaying obamacare's implementation and the economic setbacks that go with it makes sense. however, while that delay may temporarily help people like mary from northeast kansas who was recently informed that her job will be transitioned from full-time to part-time in order to avoid the employer mandate, unless we also delay the individual mandate, she will still need to find a new insurance plan or risk paying the new law's insurance tax. it simply is not fair to exempt big businesses from the law while leaving folks like mary to pick up the tab. i urge my colleagues to support

this bill which grants american families relief from this very unpopular provision. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back the balance of her time. the gentleman from georgia. mr. price: thank you, mr. speaker. i'm pleased now to yield two minutes to the gentleman from new jersey, mr. garret. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized for two minutes. mr. garrett: i thank the gentleman from georgia. the president's unilateral refusal toimplement obamacare's employer mandate for one year prints us with a question. can the president suspend a law that was enacted by congress and signed into law by that president? on this question, the constitution and the principles of this republic could not be clearer. no. nswer is an emphatic he cannot. article two, section three, it's called the take care clause of the constitution, potions a -- poses a duty upon the president to execute the laws of the land, regardless of the difficulty of enforcement or his displeasure of the law. ot only has this president

refused to enforce the law, but he's effectively rewritten the law, violating the separation of powers and infringing upon the exclusive right of this legislative body of this congress. the executive branch has no constitutional right to write a law or rewrite the law. so by refusing to enforce and effectively rewritten it, the president has set a dangerous precedent. under which laws enacted by a democratically elected congress would no longer have the force of law but will instead be relegated to the status merely of mere recommendations. which the president may choose to ignore at his whim. mr. speaker, this is not the rule of law. this is lawlessness. and that is why i have introduced house concurrent resolution 45, saying as much. finally, president obama finds obamacare to be as unworkable as he says it is, then he should call upon this congress to do the right thing and to repeal

the law immediately. with that i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from georgia. mr. price: thank you, mr. speaker. i'm pleased now to yield one minute to the gentleman from new york, a member of the ways and means committee, mr. reed. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york is recognized for one minute. mr. reed: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today and ask my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to join us in this employer mandate relief. because what is happening here, first of all, is the president ignoring the law of the land. and he's not going to be president forever. so when a president of a different party, my party, is in that office, i hope they remember the action taken today and i'll put it to the american people, that it makes sense for us in this body to require the passage of this legislation so the president's power is put in check. s to the individual mandate,

mr. speaker, this is just fair. if we're going to relieve the burden on employers then we need to relieve the burden on hardworking taxpayers and families across america. to me it's just not right, it's fair to both pass this employer mandate relief bill as well as the individual relief bill that accompanies it later for discussion. with that i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from georgia. mr. price: thank you, mr. speaker. i'm pleased to yield one minute to the gentleman from indiana, mr. stutzman. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from indiana is recognized for one minute. mr. stutzman: nau, mr. speaker. i'd -- thank you, mr. speaker. i'd like to thank my friend from georgia for yielding and for his hard work on this very important issue. mr. speaker, mr. harry reid might have said that obamacare is wonderful for america but hoosiers back home ancht buying the spin -- aren't buying the spin. obamacare was sold as a benefit to hardworking americans, but it is increasingly clear on both sides of the aisle that obamacare is hurting the very people it was sbeppeded to help. there is nothing -- intended to help. there is nothing wonderful about the situation hardworking americans face. fewer hours, more taxes, soaring premiums and smaller paychecks. just trust the bureaucrats, is what democrats said when they forced this mess on the american

people. three years later they're asking for more time. by unilaterally delaying the employer mandate for a year, the white house admitted that -- what hoosiers already know. if they're willing to accept business, shouldn't every hardworking family get an exemption as well? let's delay both obamacare mandates and continue to work toward fully repealing a failed law that is hurting hoosiers and americans across the country and holding back our economy. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from georgia. mr. price: thank you, mr. speaker. how much time remains? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia has two minutes. mr. price: thank you, mr. speaker. i'm pleased to yield the remainder of our time to the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. kelly. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized for two minutes, the remainder of the time. mr. kelly: i thank the chairman. what truly makes america unique is that everybody is treated fairly and equally under the law. i mean, that's what makes us so great. that's what people say, you know, at least if i'm in america i know i'm going to be treated the same way as everybody else.

it's not going to matter what the color of my skin is, not going to matter about how i worship, it's not going to matter whether i'm wealthy or poor, i'm going to be treated equally and fairly under the law and yet today we're talking about something is going on in our government right now where the president has decided to pick winners and losers. the president has decided that he is going to divide the country even further now because he's not going to do what's fair and what's equal, he's going to do what's convenient. now, it's pretty easy to understand what fair is. by impartiality and honestly -- honesty. it's free from self-interest, prejudice or favoritism. equal means of the same major, quantity, amount or numbers as any other person, any other group, any other class or any other part of society. so i ask you, how in the world can you say businesses don't have to comply? we're going to go ahead and give them a year off. but yet the individual is going to be held to the letter of the law.

if we are truly a country of laws, if we are truly going to treat everybody equally and fairly under the law, then how in the world can we be here today discussing this and debating this on this great floor? it just doesn't make sense. piece of legislation that continues to unravel before our very eyes, that creates uncertainty in our society, that creates uncertainty in our businesses. and now we wonder, when's the next shoe going to drop? what else is going to be changed? what laws will we enforce and what laws will we walk away from? i'll tell my friends on both sides of the aisle, do we all believe. let's treat people fairly and equally under the law. could there be anything more american than that? and the answer is no. it's self-evident. so what i ask all of us today, to do what's right for america, what's good for the gooze is good for the and goer -- goose is good for the and goer. pass both pieces. let the american people put

their head on a pillow tonight with some assurity they're going to be protected under the law and treated fairly and equaly. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. all time for debate on h.r. 2667 has expired. pursuant to house resolution 300, the previous question is ordered on the bill. 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 delay the application of the employer health insurance mandate and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 1-c of rule 19, further consideration of h.r. 2667 is postponed. for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia seek

recognition? mr. price: pursuant to house resolution 300 i call up the bill h.r. 2668, the fairness for american families act and ask for its immediate consideration. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 2668, a bill to delay the individual application of the health insurance mandate. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to house resolution 300, the gentleman from georgia, mr. price, and the ntleman from washington, mr. mcdermott, each will have 30 minutes. mr. price: i ask that all members have five days to revise and extend their remarks regarding h.r. 366 . the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. price: i rise in strong support of h r. 2668. the administration says they invited business to come in and explain how the cost and the complexity of obamacare was hurting business and hurting the economy and they granted business relief. appropriately. mr. speaker, why hasn't the

administration invited the american people into the halls of government in why hasn't the white house listened to the concerns of the american people about the costs and complexity of obamacare for american families? have american families seen a $2,500 premium decrease as promised by the president? no. in fact, premiums have gone up. the american people don't understand this law any better than the employees. employers. employers who can hire lawyers and consultants and health benefits experts. in fact, individuals who have no help understand this law even less than business. yet the administration grant red leaf only to business. mr. speaker, it's clear the president has now admitted it, his law, obamacare is not ready. deadlines have been missed. system testing is not complete. income verification systems are not in place. in the words of senator bachus the train wreck is happening. the law should be repealed, mr.

speaker. president obama disagrees with that and that's unfortunate. but we all should be able to come together on the simple principle of fairness. if business gets a one-year delay, the american people ought to get a one-year delay. it's a simple. if obamacare is behind schedule, the american people shouldn't have to bear the burdens alone. they should get the same delay as business. i urge my colleagues to come together today and to advance this very simple principle that this government will treat its citizens fairly and equally. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia reserves. the gentleman from washington is recognized. mr. mcdermott: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. many -- mr. mcdermott: now we get to the real bill. if the republicans can't repeal the affordable care act, they'll try to rot it from the inside. the last few day,000,000 republican colleagues have been

spinning this vote as a great populist effort to help the middle class. they explained that even with these repeals, we cab keep all the things we like, covering our kid until age 26, prescription drug help, adding the denial of coverage for those with -- banning the denial of coverage for those with pre-existing conditions. legally, they aren't wrong. they're not lying. they're just confusing the people. these laws will still be in place. but realistically, in the real world in which we live, it will be hard to cover your kids and subsidize drugs if the longer industry no exists in this country. without the healthy consumers the mandate guarantees only the sickest and the costliest will be left and prices will skyrocket. we have a letter from the congressional budget office

that says that if we delay this, you can expect that the prices of insurance will go up and less people will be covered. i ask unanimous consent to enter this letter into the railroad. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. -- into the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. mcdermott: the insurance industry knows this didn't going anywhere. it's a lot of political theater. in washington we tried this. in 1993, the democrats put in universal coverage and guaranteed issue. everyone had a mandate and you had, you were going to get it, the insurance companies couldn't do otherwise. two years later, the republicans repealed the guaranteed mandate. the mandate. leaving the insurance industry covering the sickest in the state of washington. within three years, there were no individual policies sold in

the state of washington. we have run this game once in washington state and you are coming out here today and running it again. it's been tried in other states. you cannot have universal coverage without a mandate, you cannot have insurance reform that guarantees everyone insurance. this isn't prophecy on my part. this has happened. a lot of what you hear about around here is that people are talking, well, gee, we got these terrible insurance rates going up. they're not going up in washington in our ex-cheage. they're not going up in oregon in the exchange. they're not going up in california in the exchange. today, new york reports they're not going up in new york. anybody who stands out here and says insurance rates are out of sight simply is misleading the people. we ought to vote no on this bill. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from washington reserves. the gentleman from georgia.

mr. price: mr. speaker, i'm pleased to recognize mr. young from wrin, the author of the bill, for his wisdom and diligence in working on this issue and recognizing that fairness was absolutely vital on this issue i'm pleased to recognize him for two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. l young: president obama announced waiving the employer mandate tax. this is great for employers who can hire people to get the message out to congress. but it does little for hardworking americans and families. a government by the people, for the people and of the people must be fair to all its citizens. it's unfair to give business a pass but not to give such treatment to rank and file americans. that's why i introduced h.r. 2668. the fairness for american amilies act.

the bill gives individuals the same reprove we give to big business. individuals must buy insurance on january 1 or pay a tax. my bill would delay implementation of the individual mandate tax for one year as well. it's worth noting that the individual tax is just as confusing to hardworking americans as the employer tax is to businesses. but families don't have teams of account tapts and lawyers to help them comply with obamacare. it isn't getting any easier, either. on july 5, an additional 145 pages of regulations was promulgated by this administration related to the individual tax. so how are ordinary americans supposed to keep up with all of this. that's why poll after poll shows that the individual mandate tax is so unpopular. in fact, only 12% of americans like it. the white house said they delayed the employer tax because it's too darn complex for businesses. well, i hear from my

constituents every day that the individual tax is just as confusing. hey want relief. the president only wants to give relief to some. i think all of our constituents deserve relief and with that in mind, i ask my colleagues from both political parties, let's take off our political blinders for once. let's do the right thing here. let's support the fairness for american families act. let's provide the same relief to america's families that the obama administration has granted to big business. it's only fair. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expire. the gentleman from georgia reserves. the gentleman from washington is recognized. . mcdore mt.: -- mr. mcdermott: i ask unanimous consent to submit the report on the ninth indiana district and the people who will benefit from that bill when it go into effect on the first of october. i yield two minutes to the gentleman from north carolina, mr. butterfield. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. butterfield: thank you, mr. mcdermott for yielding time and thank you for your leadership on this issue. i've watched you for years in your work and you are consistent. i thank you so much. i am opposed to this bill. you know, i have kind of lost track i think it's 38 times the republican controlled house has voted to repeal the affordable care act either in whole or in part. why are my colleagues wasting valuable time legislating on what amounts to be nothing more han a talking point. smog they know has no chance of becoming law. why is discrediting this president at the top of their agenda? let me remind my colleagues that there is real work to be done here on this floor on behalf of the american people. maybe my friends somehow forget student loan interest rates doubled on july 1. maybe they forget that they ram

through the a farm bill that for the first time since 1973 was without a nutrition title, leaving the door open for food banks to be closed and for millions of needy americans to go hungry. but no, they didn't forget. i suggest that many of them just do not care. today for the 38th time, mr. speaker, we volt on a bill that will -- we vote on a bill that would delay better hg, delay fixing a problem of complicated care and delay access to good, affordable health care to millions of good americans. therefore i come to the floor today to urge my colleagues to oppose h.r. 266 . i ask you to vote no on this ill-conceived legislation. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yield back. the gentleman from washington reserves. the gentleman from georgia. mr. price: i would remind my friend that it's the president who has delayed the employer man tate, all we're looking for

is fair -- the employer mandate, all we're looking for is fairness in this bill. i recognize the gentleman from minnesota, mr. paulsen. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. paulsen: it was clear from the beginning that this bill was far too complex to be inched. now it aneers administration agrees. ust a few weeks ago, the administration announce odden a blog post that they would waive the requirement. this bill will result in lost jobs and layoffs, it's not fair that the administration is keeping the individual mandate in effect letting millions of costs.ns be hit with this is an issue of fairness.

average americans are struggling urn this law and they need relief. they need protection and they need real health care reform. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yield back. the gentleman from georgia reserves. the gentleman from washington. mr. mcdermott: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that we enter into the record the report on the third congressional district of minnesota and the people who ill benefit from this act. i now yield three minutes to the gentleman from michigan, he's been here a number of years, always fighting for health care and he's living proof that the price of liberty is eternal vigilance. he's here today fighting for health care just like he did the first day he got here. john dingell. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. dingell: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. i thank my good friend for the time. and i rise in strong opposition

to the seriously misnamed h.r. 2668, fairness for american families act. it's a lot of baloney. this is nothing more than a sorry political stunt that would understood mine the affordable care act which is already bringing enormous benefits to the american people. delaying the individual mandate by one year will simply a.c.a. at a time we should be focused on fully implementing the law. just today we found that the health insurance preemyulls in new york will fall by an average of 50% when the exchanges are up and running. other stating can do the same thing that is the experience which we're finding across the country. this is happening elsewhere and i would point out that repealing the individual mandate is going to cost the americans additional health care costs not decrease them.

let us move forward with the implementation. i ask my republican colleagues to cooperate with us in that goal. i ask them to work with us to better the welfare of the american people. the congress has has spoken and the american people approve. i say it is time for taos provide real benefits to the american people rather than continuing to play these sorry political games, i say shame on those who are wasting the time of this body. let us address the problems of the economy, let us deal with jobs, employment, let us deal with the student loans where the rate of interest is doubling. let us see to it that we implement this law which will do away with things which are so hurtful for the american people such as having americans unable to get insurance because they have a pre-existing

condition or insurance companies can cancel a policy because people are getting sick. . it is time for us to deal with the real problems. einstein observed that insane sanity is doing the same thing over and over again with the full expectation that the results are going to be different. and expecting the same kind of result. i say this country needs better leadership, better understanding and a congress that will work on behalf of the american people. as you look around, i do not see that on this floor today. and again i say, shame. this is a terrible, terrible waste of the people's money and the people's time. it costs lots for us to make this congress meet and to conduct its business. and we are wasting that time now with this kind of nonsensical legislation. with thanks i yield back the balance of my time.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan yields back. the gentleman from washington reserves. the gentleman from georgia. mr. price: thank you, mr. speaker. i'm pleased now to yield one minute to a fellow physician colleague in the united states house, the gentleman from tennessee, mr. roe. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from tennessee is recognized for one minute. mr. roe: i thank the gentleman for yielding. i rise in strong support of the fairness for american families act. as chairman of the subcommittee, i've held three hearings outside the beltway. one in north carolina where we talked to businesses and individuals about the effect of the affordable care act on them and their businesses. let me just tell but some people that i heard from. one was a divorced server in a restaurant that had her hours cut from 40 to 29 so that the could, their business stay in business. this woman now is missing an entire week's worth of hours of work every single month. she can't pay her bills unless she gets another job. adjunct professors at the local community college, the same problem. and now what we've done, the audacity of what we've done is

we've forced businesses to cut these hours where they make less money and then penalize you when you don't buy something. that's wrong. the right thing to do is to lay this -- delay this for both businesses and individuals. i strongly support this bill and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from georgia reserves. the gentleman from washington. mr. mcdermott: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to enter into the record the report on the first -- the congressional district of tennessee. 5,000 young adults who have insurance on their parents' plan, 13,000 seniors who received prips drug benefit reductions -- prescription drug benefit reductions, 168,000 niors are now eligible for preventtive care that's free -- preventive care that's free and on and on it goes. i yield one minute to the leader

of the democratic party. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from california is recognized for one minute. ms. pelosi: i thank the gentleman for yielding. i thank him for also his leadership on this health care issue. i've watched him lead this debate for nearly three decades and i'm so pleased that you're here to defend the affordable care act here on the floor today. as our republican colleagues try for the 38th time to repeal the affordable care act. it is nothing more than a waste of time. this matter has been settled in congress, at the supreme court, and at the ballot box. it is the law of the land and this bill that is on the floor today to overturn it is something that the president has fairly clearly said he will veto. still yet republicans want to vote for the 38th time to repeal the affordable care act. while we're still waiting for

the first time to vote for a jobs bill. the american people expect and deserve this congress to work together as a congress, to come together, to grow the economy, creating jobs, strengthening the middle class, the backbone of our democracy. it's been over six months since this congress took office, it's over three months since the senate passed a budget bill. and for all of that time democrats have proposed a budget that would reduce taxes on the middle class, strengthen the middle class, reduce the deficit, create jobs, grow the economy. and for six months the republicans have said no. it's dead. for 38 times they've wanted to waste the public's dollar repealing once again the affordable care act. what does it mean? what is a vote for this bill mean? vote for this bill means that

already we would be -- just from who visions that are already in place, when you -- provisions that are already in this place, when you vote for this bill you're voting for children with pre-existing medical condition that they can now face discrimination. because you will eliminate the end of that discrimination. right now children no longer face discrimination on the basis of a pre-existing condition. a vote for the bill eliminates that. right now young adults are gaining coverage through their parents' plan. a vote for this bill strikes that down. right now seniors are paying less for prescription drugs and getting better treatment at a lower cost. a vote for this bill strikes that down. americans no longer face lifetime limits on care. a vote for this bill eliminates that. families are receiving rebates from insurance companies because of the medical loss ratio. very important in this bill

where insurance companies were profiting -- overly profiting at the expense of policy holders. this is a vote for the insurance companies and against policy holders. and soon a woman will no longer be considered -- being a woman will no longer be considered a pre-existing medical condition. the republicans don't like that. and whales they don't like is what will also be coming up in the bill. it will take away access to affordable coverage for 129 million people with a pre-existing medical condition. just think of it. to any of you know anyone with heart -- do any of you know anyone with heart disease, with cancer, with diabetes? any pre-existing condition, with a child born early -- that's a pre-existing condition forever. one that also has lifetime limits on it if you have your

way. take away the guarantee that women pay the same premiums as men for the same coverage. women have so much to gain in this bill. because for so long they have been discriminated -- we have been discriminated against on the basis of being a woman. you want to take that away from us again. take away the new cap on america's out-of-pocket health care cost. the list goes on and on about what is the law now that will be taken away and what will become the law in less than six months, fewer than six months, that would be very helpful for america's families. you know, the gentleman told a story about a small businessman, we always say we have our stories to tell. 96% of america's businesses are not affected by this law. mr. speaker, last year in san francisco i met with julie and

mat -- matt, parents of a little girl, 2 years old, violent. -- violet. violet was born with a rare and life-threatening form of epilepsy. for violet and her family, the affordable care act was life -changing. before the act, violet had a pre-existing condition. so she would be discriminated against in terms of health insurance. violet had lifetime limits on the coverage that she could get and annual limits on the coverage she could get. a little child with that early a pre-existing condition could possibly exhaust her lifetime limits before she was in third grade. imagine being in their shoes. imagine julie and matt watching this debate, following the work of congress, what it means to them, what it means to them if

the health of their child, the financial security of their family, hope for the future, imagine the fear, the uncertainty, the frustration they feel when they hear this debate. imagine what it would be like to witness it 38 times and the threat that it is to your family's security. for violet and other children like her, we hear stories over and over again. i always like the vision, what it means to children. whatever it is we're doing, what does it mean for our children. this means a great deal to our children and to their families. it honors the vows of our founders, of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. a healthy life, the liberty to pursue your happiness, to be whatever you want, an artist, to be self-employed, to start your business, to change jobs, not to follow your passion, not your

policy, and not to be confined because there's a pre-existing condition in your family or to be confined because of fear of someone getting ill. but really what is important today is what it does, how it damages the health security of america's families. but also the missed opportunity. when, when, if ever, do the republicans intend to bring a bill to the floor that will create jobs for our country? when are we going to have a budget that does just that? you said you wanted to send the senate to pass a bill and then we would go to conference. regular order, that's what it's called. the senate passed a bill three months ago. and still the republicans resist. what are you afraid of? are you afraid that the public will see the contrast between a investsic budget, which

in people, which builds the infrastructure of america, which has provisions to bring jobs home to america, that strengthens the mirdle class -- middle class instead of the exploitation of the middle class that is contained in the republican budget. so all this is smoke screen. let's do anything other than what the american people expect us to do here. they expect us to work together, they expect us to compromise, they expect us to find solutions, they expect us to get results for them. they expect us to act the way we used to here. other's tful of each views. instead of having a republican antigovernment ideological agenda, which says nothing, nothing is our success, to do nothing is to succeed and never is our timetable.

so let's not waste the public's time, the taxpayers' dollar on initiatives that are going no place. the political stunts, political stunts, an excuse for a legislative agenda that is not worthy of this house of representives, that is not deserving of the respect of the american people. and in the form of this legislation will not have my support. with that i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back the balance of her time. the gentleman from washington reserves. the gentleman from georgia. mr. price: thank you, mr. speaker. that was an interesting speech. by the leader of the democratic party. however, it bored little resemblance to the truth. the fact of the matter is that this bill, understanding that obamacare is a huge, destructive --ment in job destruction