vetted it and discussed it with insurers. we have gotten them comfortable with it. work.don't think it will >> people will be enrolled. that system is in place. i predict that in mid january or february, we will will be talking about this problem. we are reinsurer -- reimbursing insurance companies. it has nothing to do with enrollment. >> let me go -- >> when people go to the doctor -- >> i have a minute left and one more question. this is about section 14.1. 1401 sayslaw, section that if you go through a state exchange to get insurance under what we call obamacare, you are .ligible for a subsidy

if you do not go through that state exchange, you are not eligible for a subsidy. irs has ruled that you do not have to obey the law. subsidiesve you the whether you go through the state exchanges or not. what is the position on obeying the law and doing what the law says, which would mean that almost everybody who signs up for obama care is not eligible for a subsidy because they are not going to be state exchange is? >> we have deferred to her partners at the justice department and that the treasury. >> what is your position? >> we have deferred to our partners and litigation -- and this is in litigation right now. >> you are not worried about obeying the law? >> we feel the law covers both date and federal exchanges.

>> that is not what it says. >> the chair thanks the gentleman. we recognize the gentleman from utah. you have five minutes for questions. >> thank you mr. chairman. madame secretary, thank you for joining us today. we have art he had one hearing on this website before now, and we are all aware of the challenges with the rollout. when you come forward for committee, there are all kinds of things i would like to talk about in recent few about the health insurance tax and difficulties you are having. i think this hearing is more about the rollout of the website. i will focus on that in my questions. i think we all know, and you may knowledge the criticism of the website when it was coming out, let me ask you a question. as we go forward, have you developed a sort of master list of the issues that still need to be resolved or the issues that

you are trying to anticipate as we move forward? a we are doing that on updated basis. both on the policy side and on the technology end user side. >> that is not a static list, that is an evolving list? >> yes sir. -is it possible for that list to be shared with the committee. >> as you say, it is not a static list. it is a dynamic list. it is basically anticipating what the next policy choices are and what will happen. we are happy to give the committee an outline, but there is no great secret to it. >> i want to talk about some of the issues that were dressed at the 834 40. enrollment is a creasing that increasing. your lines going in opposite directions. with that being said, do you have a sense of how many 834 errorsay have that need to be addressed?

>> i can tell you that we know in the early days there were serious numbers of errors. we're in the process of actually hands matching individuals with insurance companies. they have added some important personnel to the tech team. they are helping to identify where the bottlenecks were. we are seeing a vastly improve system. we want to go back and make sure that everyone who thinks they are enrolled in the early days is actually master fei company and that the company oaks are matched on our end. underway.ss is a lot of fixes have been added in october and november. >> in terms of that declining you calculatew do that? is it an average of all the plans? is that a snapshot? how do you go about figuring that out? i is about looking at the site and determining the errors that

occur along the way. pages that came up where people and it wouldn't- locko accept an id. that is a dynamic process that is underway. on some of the other issues on the backend, they have predicted 6 million individuals will potentially see subsidies. not everyone will start up again everyone, and the open enrollment. -- open woman period goes past that. is there -- are we going to have this system in place for the subsidies and payments at the backend? will the backend system be structured in such a way were the subsidy payments are able to be made? >> they will be made and they will be made in a timely fashion. they will be made in a way that the insurers agree work for

them. as the full system is being automated, there is a step in the early months to make sure that the payment to insurers -- individuals will be enrolled. they will qualify for subsidies and the insurer will accept a premium. at that point, on individual will be insured and have full benefits. ,hat will start in mid-january and the insurance companies will then receive reimbursement for the tax credit and the cost sharing is eligible for individuals. it is a two-step process. one affects the individuals in the second affect the companies. there are 300 companies total. we have a system that has been signed off by them. get them paid in a timely fashion, we will actually do that. >> the subsidies go directly to the insurance companies? >> yes sir. >> when you discuss building up

the backend, this reticular component -- -- particular component -- >> there is a manual workaround for everything that is not automated. it will be manually until the automation is fully completed. we need to test it and make sure works. the payment system will absolutely go forward. >> thank you. i yield back. the vice-gnize chairman of the subcommittee. five minutes for questions. >> welcome back to the committee. i may not have an opportunity to go through all the things on my list. we have submitted questions in the past and not receive answers. let me again encourage you to respond to previous questions and to these questions because they are important and my instituents are asking us -- fact, constituents earlier this week, a single mother, she was just over the amount. she has a good job and works for a small wire. -- employer.

she is being hit with a premium, and unsubsidized premium. she is not eligible for a subsidy. it is $1500 a month for her and her child. the debt situation come to mind? were you ever concerned about that individual? >> i am concerned about all individuals having affordable health coverage. >> apparently she does not have affordable health coverage. -- lost her foyer coverage employer coverage. >> her employer chose to drop the coverage? >> because of the expense. you are here in april 18 and you had received two weeks for her a discussion document from the mckinsey group. my information is that you were briefed on this report two weeks prior. that is what is listed on the final page of the report. let me play a little clip of our interaction from april.

>> sounds better today than it did then. let me just tell you what we are dealing with. the study that the mckinsey group put together dealt with healthcare.gov and its readiness. i was asking you about the readiness. were movingthat we ahead and we had the federal health on track and on time. do you recall that exchange between the two of us? >> i am sure it took place there. >> two weeks before you were told by the mackenzie group that number one, they found extensive problems and were not allowed to make the launch date. no one was in charge and the

completed project with a moving target. you were aware of all of that when you visited the subcommittee in april. >> i ask for the mckinsey group to come in six months ahead of launch date and give us an analysis of their method -- advice.s -- best we acted on their recommendation. >> you are the one who commissioned the mckinsey group? >> yes sir. >> i have to ask you, what did you do with that information? you are not being honest with last two weeks later when we were talking in committee. >> i would disagree. we wanted the report six month out. we wanted to make sure that we had independent eyes and ears to look at the readiness and the challenges. we took their faith very seriously. their primary -- we took their advice very seriously.

their primary advice was about the right -- reliability of the hub. he focused a lot of time and attention -- >> may i submit that they were actually accurate in that assignment. >> the hub has worked beautifully from start to finish. five he testified this morning that people cannot actually make their payments now when they go on healthcare.gov. accurate. not i said that a lot of people have not yet made their payments. >> i was unable to make my payment on the federal exchange for the state of texas. i was told that i could not make that payment. >> you don't pay the federal government. -- you make ate payment directly to the insurer. someone will be covered. but the payment may not be made. >> you have to be enrolled by the 23rd and make a payment by the end of the year to be fully insured.

going to guarantee that the doctor that sees that patient on january 4 is actually covered for that is that? that doespany insurance today. you are enrolling in a private insurance plan. >> you have to make the premium payment. they are cover december 23, but they never wrote the check. >> then they are not covered. >> are you going to make good for those doctors who see patients in the couple of -- first couple weeks of january? from a small practice, you get your cash flow interrupted 2-3 weeks, you are in big trouble. >> if an insurance company is unenrolled into a customer, they will make good with the provider. we tell people over and over again that they are enrolled when they make a payment. we turned our name over to the insurance company.

>> if they are enrolled by the 23rd, they will be covered. >> not until they pay. >> do you know how hard it is to actually make that payment? >> thank you senator. >> have you done that yourself? >> i have not. that's it is almost impossible. i have never seen a business where you are about to make the payment and you cannot. expired.ime has the chair recognizes the gentleman from georgia. five minutes for questions but --. -- five minutes for questions. >> thank you for being with us today. i'm glad there has been some progress since the last time we met. i am concerned about what will happen when the insurance is mandated and goes live on the first of the year. i voted against the health-care bill. the whole thing is unmanageably big. we have only seen the tip of the iceberg. i hope i am wrong about that. i want to ask you about the

fundamental chore of trying to get folks enrolled in the plan. are there other insurance plans out there that are internet- based? are the folks who are selling health insurance on the internet-based exchanges? >> i think some of become please have internet sites. -- some of the companies have internet sites. there are a variety of plans available. i cannot tell you how broad- based that is. i know a variety of companies where you can sign up in person with an agent or sign up online. are wehat extent reaching out to folks and learning from what they are doing and utilizing the tech technologye -- the that is on the internet? lot about reach and conversation about what works and what doesn't.

unique integrated products because not only is an individual identified and verified, but can then qualify for a tax credit and cost sharing based on his or her income, he or she can qualify for the federal marketplace and medicaid services. in the federal website, each plan, each state offers a different number of plans. has a different level of benefits. it is basically an integrated system that tries to get you to the right place so you can make a choice. health insurers operating on the internet able to take advantage of the unique features of the law?

>> not unless they verify that information through the house. >> is that being done? >> yes. >> for private insurance companies? >> yes sir. they do not have direct access to the hub. that.nderstand >> blue cross blue shield is doing this. they are doing enrollment all over the country. >> i am asking if there are other internet-based exchanges are the functioning. it seems to me like that would be a helpful approach to have all hands on deck. >> to clarify, they are. they ae health insurance folks are engaged and involved. are rectally involved as well as individuals navigating on their own. >> are you telling us that folks who otherwise would be able to get health insurance through healthcare.gov should get their insurance through a private- ?ased exchange such as e-health

>> of their subsidy eligible, they have to catch the hub. -- touch the hub. the ey can do it with health insurance folks, they can do it on their own, they can do it from the call center. there are a variety of ways that individuals can do that. if they are not subsidy eligible and they make more than $46,000 as an individual or $92,000 as a family, they can enroll directly in a marketplace plan. healthcare.govt is supposed to provide is to match folks out with subsidies as well as products that are out there. that can be done through private exchanges that exist right now. did that have to be done through healthcare.gov. ? eligibility,y

which involves verification of income, verification of citizenship, it has to touch healthcare.gov. other than that, the enrollment process -- >> that is provided by a private-based internet exchange? is that correct? >> a do not have access to the social security database, to the irs database. that is the piece to verify the individual's eligibility and can move them forward. that is being done now by agents and brokers, by the health folks, by a variety of people along the way. >> thank you. >> the chair now recognizes the gentleman from kentucky. five minutes for questions and i would like to ask the gentleman from pennsylvania to take the chair. andhank you mr. chairman madam secretary, thank you for

being with us. we were admonished to treat you with respect. we should doinly that. we want to do that. concern is our first with constituents that we represent. some people have said that we are simply trying to put obstacles up for the successful implementation of this act of for myselftell you and many others, we are here to get our constituents are genuinely concerned and upset about what is going on. and a lot of it begins with the way that this bill was passed. when it came to the fore, the most comprehensive change for health care in america that has ever been undertaken, no one could offer one amendment to the bill. there are very deep feelings about this still.

many health care experts today say that we are going quickly to a to health care system. we will have one health care system for wealthy americans, and then everyone else will be under the affordable care act full -- affordable care act. -- that isexactly exactly what has happened in other countries that have gone down this path. when this legislation passed, your office was given immense powers. you are given immense decision- making authority. we know that many regulations have been written. can you tell me how many pages of regulations have been written to be implemented? >> i can get you that number. i do not know. >> do you have an idea? >> i do not know. >> you have a range? >> i would like to get you accurate information. >> you do not know? >> i just told you that i do not

know. >> the president went all over the country talking about how this would save money and people would have lower premiums. i can tell you that those of us on the hill who have been going on bbc health exchange have discovered that our premiums are certainly much higher than they were. when we talk to our constituents going on the exchanges, we discovered that the majority of them had much higher premiums as well. thenderstanding is that subsidy will cost taxpayers over $1 trillion. -- i'm been told that sorry. cost thedy will taxpayers $1 trillion. somebody will pay for. ask you aso like to question because of what is perceived as a real inequity in this is some.

some people are being favored and some people are not being favored. when you go to the rotary club, and people ask you, do you have to go on to the exchange? does the president have to go on to the exchange? do the political appointees have to go onto the exchange? that -- is that fair that the rest of the american people have to go onto the exchange? but you and the president and the people in the executive branch of government do not have to go onto the exchange. >> the vast majority of americans with insurance also will not be on the exchange. already haveeople coverage. it is, as i said to this committee in october, illegal for me to go onto the exchange. i misspoke slightly because the reason that it is illegal for me, which i knew, is because i am medicare eligible.

it is illegal for a company to sell me a policy. >> you do not have to go on medicare. allowed to be sold a policy on the exchanges. >> the bottom line is that the executive branch of government does not have to go on the exchange. everyone else does have to go on the exchange. taxpayers will pick up because the billion federal government will pay more of the state medicare cost. >> that is fully paid for in the health care law. it reduces the deficit. but it is fully paid for by the taxpayer dollars. >> unlike medicare part d, this bill was actually paid for. thate president said everyone's premiums would decrease. the president said that people would be able to keep their plants top the president said

that they would be able to keep their doctors. that is simply not the case. there is a lot of frustration and we are upset about it. my time is expired. thank you. >> you are recognized next for five minutes. >> let me clarify some things using the single yes or no strategy. is it not true that the congressional budget office says that a out of 10 americans who will go to the marketplace should qualify for assistance? >> i think that is true. no, is the affordable care act 84 -- i know you refer to that, but if you could explain that? >> it is paid for.

the congressional budget office estimates that it will reduce the deficit in the first 10 years by about $120 billion. over the next 10 years, it will reduce it closer to $1 trillion. the funding or delaying or repealing the affordable care act actually adds to the deficit. >> isn't it true that many people who have gotten these letters about the cancellations will be able to go to the marketplace and find something better, or at least as good? in the individual insurance market, which is what we are on ang about, lance change very rapid basis. they are constantly refreshed. having a plant ceased to exist is not a novel idea. there are significant percentages of people who will be grandfathered in. they will have the same plan

that they had in march. it does not change at all. for others, they will have choices. for many of them, choices that they never had before. they may get some financial assistance if they do not have a formal covered in their work ways. they may also be able to choose in a competitive marketplace and not be locked out because of pre-existing conditions. they will not pay 50% more because they're women, or worried about being dropped or kicked out if they get it down the road. go,e have been going by and so i would like to read you a letter that i received. i will contribute to the anecdote pile. it is from janine and jeff. many aspects of this debate are focused on and go to, we thought we would share with you our positive experience with the website.

like many american families are young adult children ask for help in viewing the options and making the health insurance incisions while they were visiting -- decisions while they were visiting us over thanksgiving. we went to healthcare.gov and it worked. it was easier to navigate than the website of the private sector health insurance company. the other good news is that her daughter erica is pregnant with a baby due in march of the 14. her current health insurance policy is expiring on december 31. it were not for the affordable care act, it is unlikely that a woman who is six months pregnant would be able to obtain health insurance at all. the aca is helping her to just adjust to a new plan. we're getting more and more of those stories. i want to say to madam secretary, i am absolute

confidence that the role that you played in bringing affordable care to millions, tens of millions of americans, will go down in history as one of the great achievements of our country throughout its entire history. i want to thank you for that. i understand and fully agree that the rollout was unpleasant and as horrible as it could have year, andby the new into the new year, we will find all of these stories. my understanding is that 39 million people went to either state or federal websites, is that true? >> i think that is accurate. we know that we had at the federal website 5 million visitors in the first six days of december. >> what does that indicate? >> as we have seen, there is tremendous interest.

very updated and easy to use anonymous shopper that gives people information before they go on and enroll. coming backe several times. it is an emporium decision. we see people visiting -- i'm important decision. we see people visiting the site. they are desperate for coverage that they never had in their lives. >> we will recognize the gentleman from illinois. secretary.u madam i will try to be polite and nice and kind. this is difficult. we are trying to get the truth out. you testified last congress that thectually doubled counted $500 billion. 500 billion was used to credit medicare. you admitted that. you cannot tell us that this is

paid for when we doubled counted $500 billion. as for the amount of enrolled illinois citizens, 20 times more have enrolled in medicaid. -- theyicaid explosion are enrolled fraudulently or through the new expansion. it will kill the states. --am secretary, when adam amazon.com record books sold, paid for theho is books. not what is in their shopping cart and what is on their wish list. theseas earn is that numbers are fraudulent. it is not those who have actually purchased plans. return ask that when you , you give us accurate information as to who has purchased plans. do you understand our

frustration? >> as you know, we did not take over the private insurance market. that thosetelling us who have been shopping are enrolled. that is why we are frustrated. >> this is not medicare. >> let me go to my next question. myi had my phone on and when phone rang, i left it on because i wanted to talk to a democrat state senator from my home state of illinois. he said, and i quote, mandated preventive services are laid to and onto premium prices. you cannot say that is preventative care services are free of charge can you? >> they are free to the consumer. >> there is no free lunch.

if the premiums increase because of the mandated coverage, which ,he state senator, a democrat who does oversight for insurance for the state of illinois says that if you mandate coverage, it rolls directly onto premiums. premiums increase. that these are free of charge. >> again, consumers will not have a co-pay or deductible. will you admit that they have a higher premium? >> i do not. i think a lot of actuaries will tell you that if you have preventative care and prevents a more costly hospital stay or cancer -- >> i got it. we will agree to disagree. thes like talking to republic of korea or something. question, --

--mr. chairman, you have to >> of the democrats want to yield their time, -- >> you have to give her the opportunity to answer the questions. >> i do not. >> the gentleman will suspend. given the secretary time to answer questions. plans offered to congressional employees and -- nine only nine offer policies exclude abortion coverage. mine secretary, you promised last time you were here that you would provide a national list of those who cover and do not cover abortion and abortion services. we have yet to receive that list. folks are shopping now.

you, when we went through this last time, we received a call from my office from someone in the country who was pro-abortion. they think before that question because they wanted to know. d me for that question because they wanted to know. >> every plan lists land benefits. and by law they must list of abortion. i suggest that the shopper looks in the plan benefits section. >> last time i was here, i held up numerous policies that did not explain that. you promised to provide the list of those insurance plans. all we're asking is for you to keep a promise. >> it is a summary of benefits and plans. like please provide us with a list. >> i will ask -- >> will you promise that? if it is on the website, can you

provide it? were you able to complete your answer? >> i assume so. >> mr. green of texas is recognized for five minutes. madame secretary thank you for being here. let me give you a little bit of a history lesson both -- history lesson. in 2003 when the prescription drug plan did not allow members on the floor of the house. i remember walking out in front of the capital and seeing the sunrise from the east morning on prescription drug plans. we were there all night. you can dislike the law, but you cannot say that it was passed without amendment on the floor. that is not uncommon for

complicated bills that we have. i won't yield, i only have five minutes. the other issue is that the administration is not covered on the exchanges -- any employer doesn't need to go to the exchanges. members of congress, we are the exception and it is our own doing. i disagree with a lot of the things that the senate but not bell, and the ranking member and i both have some issues with that bill. bill, we had hours and hours of amendments in this committee. i had 30 amendments on my own. a number of them are bipartisan. our committee had plenty of time to debate this bill. we did that with the prescription drug plan as well. we had a lot of committee members, but not one on the floor. let me get to my questions.

all, since logging onto the exchanges on october 1 and the healthcare.gov website, there were glaring and unacceptable issues. i know you took responsibility for that. i'm pleased that we have seen a great deal of progress being made since then. i hope that the affordable care act can deliver on its promise to deliver coverage to americans. that market is still available. aca is broken the and fixes need to be made. we need to make the experience of purchasing health care on healthcare.gov easier for consumers. it is a process that you are learning every day? in business, we learn everyday to fix things to serve the customer. definitely learning every day. since i was here last, the

anonymous shopper feature is on. we just added today the automated medicaid transfers recognizing that some states are not able to accept them in an automated fashion. we will do both. we have added a spanish version of the website experience. it rolled out last week. we are in the process of, as i said, building financial management. each and every day, we learn something from consumer experience. it is a process where each week we are adding fixes and identify problems. we will continue to do that. it is a first of its kind product. we will continue to make the experience more smooth for consumers. thet is in port and that affordable care act and the website work. in the middle of november, we had 800 people show up on saturday morning. used paper applications.

it is my next question. filled or so people who out this paper applications in those four hours on a saturday morning, how are they being dealt with through the exchanges? of people a number who used paper applications early on. we are re-contacting each and every one of those people and offering them somebody to help walk them through the web experience, or inviting them to do it themselves. that is very much under way on a casework basis. we want to make sure that anyone who filled out a paper application is welcome into the system. it is interesting though because my colleague he objects to the marketplace, what the marketplace is actually a compromise in the senate. we house bill was passed and had an exchange. it would separate because we also had a public option on that exchange. it is only market-based.

i agreed of my colleagues, my insurance has gone up like you. i am over 65. my wife and i, we're going to pay higher premiums. we did have trouble even through the one for the members of congress. most of the people in our country are not going to deal with the exchange because their employer continues to provide their coverage. they do not have to worry about this. i have had dozens and dozens of seniors because of all this information out there who are confused and who have medicare. they say they are concerned about their medicare. medicare has only been benefited by the aca. thank you for your time. >> the gentleman's time is expired. for puttingank you a lot of work into this. there's more work that we all have to do on mental health issues. i would welcome an opportunity to meet with a number of us to

talk about the things that we need to do to help mental health in america. i appreciate your dedication to this. it is helpful for us to see the breakdowns of what is taking place with regards to the states and the marketplaces. i want to ask some clarifying questions to see if you know or can find out. of those who are signed up, you have signed up in the marketplace. we know how many were previously eligible for medicaid? do we know that number? >> i do not know that number, but we are trying to get those numbers. we know that a number of people, even in non-ask engine stayed are presenting themselves as medicaid eligible. what are the old roles and what are the new roles? >> will you be able to find out? at 33% of income or whenever it is in various

states. it would be nice to know how many were previously eligible but did not sign up. can you get is that information? >> yes. but in terms of the analysis of data, of those who -- >> can i interrupt for one second? there is a third category. we know there are people who are currently enrolled in medicaid who are region rolling. they are not committed to either category, but they are renewing. >> renewals, previously eligible, newly eligible. who have gone to the marketplace, the federal and state marketplace, how many were previously uninsured but are now covered? how many were injured but had a plan cancelled? do we have that kind of information? >> we may be able to get some of that from the insurance companies. we would not collect that specific information.

>> people are talking about whether the policies would cost less. is there a way -- is there anything built-in where we can actually find out how many people pay more and how many people pay less? on companies.y we are talking about 4 million insured him a switch a plan, they may have played something -- paid something, but that his company data, not data that we would have. we do not have that comparison. if we hadd be great tax on that. it would be helpful. when i talk to people who are brokers or agents, they are describing that many of those who are signing up for people who may have had help problem -- health problems and they are going to be marketplace to offset some of the costs. it may also be people who are healthy, and their prices have changed too.

the aca was designed to help those who could not even afford health insurance before sign up. will we have breakdowns based upon those factors? >> again, we will be able to tell you hopefully in the not- too-distant future demographic breakdowns. because we do not collect personal health information from anyone because there is no longer a pre-existing condition clause, we will not be able to tell you who of the population is sick or not say. >> the question on the questionnaire -- people have to say if they have a disability or a mental health problem or an emotional problem. can we look at that data? >> for medicaid eligibility, sir, there is a question on pregnancy and a question on disability. those are the only two questions.

that may put someone into a different income called -- income bracket for medicaid. that is the only health information that is collected. we do not have personal health information collected. youou have mentioned that contacted mckinsey about the readiness of the exchanges before the launch. did the white house encourage you to do this or did you make the exchange on your own? >> we made a decision going forward. i think it is prudent to invite people who have not been directly involved with building a product to take a look at their -- get their assessment on how things are going and what the problems are. hopefully you can take their guys. >> i would like to know what changed because of their report. the president said that people have suggestions to improve what is going on. i am wondering, you have been immersed in this for quite a

while, are there some recommendations you have for congress of what we need to do to take care of some of the problems we are facing? >> i certainly think that we will know a lot as we compete -- complete this first europe open enrollment. i would love the opportunity to come in and discuss that with this committee and others. this is, as you know, the final phase of the 3.5 year implementation that has been underway. that we know a lot about young adults that we did not know then. we know a lot about preventative care issues. mental health will be a part of this. we will have a list to share with you. we would love to work in a bipartisan fashion to fix the bell. there is no question -- the bill. there's no question that i would welcome that opportunity. >> the gentleman from florida

for five minutes. to see all pleased of the progress is being made with healthcare.gov. in report from consumers recent enrollment numbers suggest that individuals using the website to obtain quality affordable health insurance are having a much smoother and successfully aryans. thank goodness. experience.l thank goodness. i was surprised that the state of florida is leading in enrollment out of all of these .ggs -- states we have had so many political roadblocks and so much misinformation. this is good news for floridians in a big way. -- if it had been working great right off the bat, these numbers would be doubled. i know families and individuals have more time. we really want to push over the next few weeks.

you said that they have 3.5 months. but that is correct. -- >> that is correct. you know that key members of the florida delegation as well as mayors and civic leaders and health care providers have been stepping up and getting information to people who desperately need it. florida has one of the highest numbers of uninsured americans -- andcountry but clearly people are eager for information and welcome the opportunity to make choices or themselves. i had one report yesterday that a local enrollment in a church sign up 50 individuals on sunday. then i had this e-mail from a tampa family health center with two stories. who has beenan without health insurance for three years said that it was a blessing to finally have insurance. she said this with a smile and

replied how she was able to finally up or her medications for her pre-existing conditions. our tax credit was $530. she purchased insurance that is $35 a month. man-year-old single young who had no insurance for the works for ars -- he small business and his employer was not able to afford private insurance. he was able to get a tax credit for $2200. this premium is $28 a month. he was extremely pleased and agreed to share his story. he said he was too shy to speak in public. robert, we are sharing your story today. i am grateful that now we can replicate these good news stories. we have a long way to go. the small business question. we are all disappointed that the small business website is not going to be up and running as

early as we would have liked. but that affect the tax credits that are available for small business owners? those tax credits that encourage small businesses to provide health insurance or help make it more affordable. >> no. it will not impact that. as you know, we had earlier suggested that at the federal level, and this is different in some of the states, at the federal level, we would not be able to aggregate cream yams to give employees of businesses under 50 a choice. employees to give employees of businesses under 50 a choice. we are working with agents and brokers which is the way that small business owners get coverage traditionally. >> some are not that sophisticated. it is 3-4 employees.

there are a lot of restaurant owners. the tax credit this year will go to a 50% tax credit for eligible employers. it rises to 50%. .e will absolutely be enrolling we have thousands of applications for jobs. folks working to get enrolled. it is different from the market where business owners have a 12 month enrollment. -- 12 month enrollment period. be able to enroll people each and every month as employee insurance comes up for renewal. >> and the tax credit when they file -- smallg now when you are a business owner looking into that, i do not think that small businesses understand how the tax credit gross from 35% to 50%

and how that might make a big difference. click the small business administration has been a terrific partner. they are doing a lot about reach and education. lex we recognize the gentleman from new jersey. >> thank you very much. good morning to you madam secretary. my questioning will be in two parts. the first is regarding the rule of law. the second regards the medicaid expansion. i will be going into an exchange, that is how i read the statue. those who work with me and our office will be going into the exchange. members,rge other including senator reed -- this is a rule of law.

to raking member waxman, you indicated that the president decided on a transition policy. even though the statute as i read it has requirements that 2014.on january 1, from your perspective, what is the statutory authority with the president to have announced this transition policy? >> the statutory authority is the enforcement discretion which is available under the law to us and the president has asked us to use our force the discretion to not pursue a penalty against insurers who would voluntarily transition ofw a toividuals in a market

continue in that market plan. this diversity state regulators. they get the first call. they regulate the marketplace. there is no mandate to insurers. it is voluntary, but it allows them -- therom your perspective ability of the president to do that is based upon discretion. i respectfully agree with that. thank you for answering the question. as i read the statue, there are subsidies for state exchanges, but no subsidies for the federal exchange. i presume that that was placed into the statute to encourage states to have their own exchanges. it is a carrot and stick approach. from your perspective, madam secretary, what is the statutory authority for permitting subsidies for the federal exchange?

>> again, i am not a lawyer. i will defer to the department of justice. they are mandated to pay the subsidies and the interpretation omb and the department of justice that the to eveny is consented know it is not explicitly spelled out. i am not a lawyer and i would defer to them. >> it is my legal position that the court will rule against the administration in this regard. obviously this is now before the courts. in the 3.5 years since the aca passage, have the president ever proposed a legislative change to any aspect of the law?

>> i'm trying to refresh my memory. i cannot answer that question. i will come back with an answer. but it is my understanding that the president has never asked or any statutory change whatsoever. >> i can tell you one. i do recall one. it has been in his proposals. we have a provision involving state waivers of medicaid expansion. time to start at 2017. he has suggested it and it is part of our budget proposal, and they are accelerating that. states would have full authority. there are other provisions in our budget plans. pieces of legislation that are coming through that way that we could get you enumerated. the medicaid matter, i have great concerns that the proposal you have signed regarding medicaid

expansion -- i know you're not able to provide those signatures today, but i would like an opportunity when it is convenient for you to have those figures. fews my belief that quite a were already medicaid eligible. it was not based upon the new law. time isentleman's expired. recognizel -- we will the gentleman from maryland, mr. starbase. banes.nk you for -- sar >> thank you for being here. you have been very stoic. you have accepted responsibility in the failure of the website. you have been aggressive in trying to improve the situation. the evidence you have presented today suggest that things are on the mend. americans are able to access the government website, which is the portal to affordable health

care. i think if you step back, the bigger story here is there were previously millions of americans who were essentially trapped in a world where they could not access health care. there was literally no options available. if they had pre-existing conditions, even a substandard plan that was offered on the individual market, they did not provide any options for them. not even have the opportunity to complain or face the challenges that now some of them are facing. but the fact that they are trying to access an option of and yes,e care encountering some difficulties in having to push through those, even that is progress.

before, they did not even have that. it is important for us to keep that in perspective. saidis why i think you ,arlier i heard someone say ,aybe it was chairman waxman one of the common emotional responses for people when they actually can enroll is that they break down in tears. atrs of pent-up frustration not being able to access affordable care. >> we know that in the individual market, which is the market that the new marketplaces are addressing, a large number of national studies show that it could be as many as 25% of people who try to buy a plan were turned down totally. no plans at no price. then you have people who were individually and medically underwritten.

virtually everyone in the marketplace. that is beneficial if you are healthy and don't have any likelihood of a pre-existing condition. if you get sick along the way or you are diagnosed, you could be medically underwritten going forward to eliminate the condition that you need the care somewhatchoices were limited to a lot of people. >> the promise of this is to create a new normal for the american people where the option of getting health care israel. that wasn't the way it was before for tens of millions of americans -- the option of getting health care is real. >> the vast majority of large -- you were not medically underwritten and you were not penalized based on age. you're in as far as employment.

if you work for yourself, if you are a service worker and didn't have a portal coverage, your options were greatly -- >> even that will be more rational going forward. as you eliminate discrimination based on pre-existing conditions, you addressed problems of portability that we saw before, someone leaves one employer and goes to the next, those are all fixes that will improve the employer-based system as well. in terms of the challenges, obviously the launch of the website was much more difficult but therexpected, were always going to be challenges. there's going to be new challenges. corner, around the there's going to be difficulties and challenges associated with some of the payment issues that will happen down the line. these are always going to be there. there will always be difficulties. this is a major, major structural change to the health

care system which is going to improve it eventually, but we have to anticipate that there will be difficulties. we have to soldier through those. that is the american ethic, you take challenges and overcome them. issues ise of the are a lot of the people who coming and finding new plans, maybe they have to pay a little bit more or maybe the deductible is higher in some instances, but what they don't compare it against is the exposure they had under the old plan that may be they never had the occasion to experience. >> the gentleman's time has expired. we have 15 minutes left and seven members to still ask questions. we will go to two minutes per member. >> did you really mean to say that the affordable care act has

not resulted in increased premiums for the non-subsidized? >> sir, what i said is preventive care -- >> you are ascribing it to the preventive health care aspect. >> that's what he asked me. that's what i answer. >> jonathan gruber, the architect of this bill said it is basically income redistribution. there is also the increased premium people are paying for their policies if they are not subsidized. do you have an estimate of how much -- what are the amount of increased taxes -- excuse me, increased premiums people are paying to subsidize others on the exchange? >> no, sir, i don't. you can only talk about increased premiums -- dr. gruber would be one to suggest that if you compare like benefits to like benefits. >> let me go on. danny from baton rouge is losing his coverage.

he says this is my apocalypse now. up 371%. coverage went monthly premiums for a family of four to $913 a month with a $4000 deductible. i think any would like to choose his benefits as opposed to that. businesses are going to lose their benefits, as many as 66% of employers according to your analysis will lose their grandfathered status. do you think administration would support my employee health care protection act that would allow employers to keep their group health care they have now in 2014 and beyond? >> as you know, theallow snapshs not our office estimating anything. it was a description of the turnover that existed prior to 2010 in the individual and small group market.

,hose statistics that you cited and i think in the small group market, there are lots of plants that are grandfathered. there are other plans that are offering transition and early renewals and we are watching that. >> will the administration approved the same law as given for the individual that if a small business wishes to keep their policy, they would be allowed to do so? xp suggestion about a transitional of policy applies to both. the chair recognizes mr. ingle from new york. >> i just want to say that new york is a good example of what's possible when the federal government as a willing and acausiastic partner in implementation. we have hospitals persist dating in the various delivery system reform. our medicaid program is expanding.

dates like new york are finding success. i would like to know what your experience has been in states that have obstructed efforts, mainly republican governors, to implement the aca, compared to states have adopted all these measures. our americans experiencing easier times obtaining affordable health care coverage and has the recusal of some states to expand medicaid affected the rollout? what we arehat seeing every day is governors actually considering the medicaid expansion, some as you say in new york, california, others adopt it very early on. we were pleased just her day that the governor of iowa and dictated an interest in moving ahead on medicaid expansion. the governor of pennsylvania recently also indicated his interest in doing the same.

so we are working actively with states around the country. think it is enormously difficult for consumers in states where there is no medicaid expansion, they hear about the opportunity for affordable health coverage, only tofind out that they earn less to qualify for a tax credit in the marketplace, and really they have no viable option at all. i'm am told by our navigators on the ground, the people in community health centers, is one of the worst conversations they can have in this time. >> we spoke with the governor of kentucky the other day him and he explained to us kentucky, generally a republican state, where it is working really well, where you have a governor who is a partner, who wants to see it work, it can work and it should work. i hope that more governors would continue to do what is in the best interest of their constituents, rather than playing political games.

thank you. >> you just mentioned kentucky. 80% of the people signing up on our exchanges are medicaid. it has been a concern of mine when i was in state government before. medicaid has 72 moving people and we expect an increase of 25 million over the next 10 years. i believe medicaid is important for low income children and disabled seniors that it was designed for. do you believe medicaid should be a program of last resort or should it become its own interest program, as it is now? >> i think the enrollment numbers are about 51 million, not 72. also, medicaid has played a critical role for lower income americans, not only offering a wide range of health benefits, but at a lower cost per capita than private insurance and medicare.

>> the question i want to get at, though, your department has estimated that about 5 million that previously purchased insurance through their employer would move to medicaid. number we got. are you familiar with that? years,e next four estimates of 5 million will move to medicaid. >> i'm not aware of that. the office of actuary is really an independent office, but i can check that out. estimate is $20 billion in this group of people who previously purchased health insurance through their employer who will be moving to medicaid because of the affordable care act. one of the questions about income, there is a question about income verification and residency verification. i know that is up to the states to do, but the states that don't expand medicaid, right now it is

just like trust the federal government's numbers. >> again, sir, we don't enroll anyone in medicaid. what we do is look at income eligibility, and based on the state law, send that individuals name and the information that has been collected to the state. the state actually is the connection between the individual and medicaid. going on right now. we don't enroll in medicaid. >> but they have to take your data. recognizes mr. griffith. >> let me just let you know that i agree with the legal reasoning on the matters are up earlier in the testimony. i do find it interesting that when we are listening to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, they talk about scare scare tactics.

this is similar to what they said back in the summer in september when we were holding hearings. we were hearing the plan would not be ready on october 1. i am concerned we will have some of that same kind of thing. we are being attacked for asking questions. we are just trying to get the information. it is a matter of we are trying to get to the bottom of a lot of these problems that we are concerned about out there. obviously, one of the tactics, they say this is all just political. you certainly have accepted responsibility and you don't believe we caught the problems of the website, thereby making the public distressed at. is that correct? my colleagues have implied that somehow we are responsible for all that distressed out there, and i don't think that's accurate. i don't believe the federal employee health benefit plan is a skimpy plan. i was previously on the federal

employee health benefit plan and my family is facing 117% gorease out of our pocket to on to the exchange here in d.c. you don't think plan you have a skimpy, do you? >> no sir, i don't. you're going to see younger employees pay a lot less. >> let me say this in regard to medicaid. you are sending people to the states based on income alone. they may have sufficient income -- the man i have enough income but they qualify for medicaid under income but they don't qualify for medicaid because they own a house. they have to choose whether they whether theyset or

want medicaid. >> the state law in state officialsnrollment will make the determination of whether that individual will be enrolled. when they present at the marketplace based on 130 three percent or less. in virginia right now will be based on a lot less because virginia has not raised their medicaid eligibility. we would make the determination and referred that. >> madam secretary, my governor of of georgia particularly want an answer to this question and i'm sure all the other 49 governors would, too. the affordable care act forced states to retain eligibility requirements for the decay through the maintenance of effort provision going back to 2009. with the expiration of these provisions, they will finally have the flex ability to tailor their medicaid program to the best address -- to best address the needs of their population.

will the medicaid maintenance of effort expire for all states beginning on january 1, 2014? >> yes sir. >> thank you. i want to ask you quickly, in health plans, this california-based company is 10 years old. i think they have spent about $800 million developing their program, allowing people to go onto their website and find plans, yet we spend seven times that much reinventing the wheel. can you tell me why we didn't just use that technology or maybe some other silicon valley company to have a public-private partnership, rather than starting over from scratch, and who made that decision? >> i would tell you that while there are some comparisons with the e-health situation, there

are a number of features very different in the federal website that were required. lth doesn't determine citizenship eligibility. >> did you make that decision am a or was that made by someone else? >> what decision, sir? to start overn from scratch. >> i don't think they did start over from scratch. they adopted a number of the known technologies that were in place. >> how many times did you actually visit with the president since 2009 or 2010 when you came on board, hammy personal visits did you have with him at the white house regarding the affordable care act? >> a lot. critics can you verify that -- >> can you verify that? >> to gentlemen's time has expired. secretary, in a november, cmsin

announced they were considering increasing payments to insurance with sick or than average customers under section 1342 of the aca. this program is proposed -- supposed to be financed by insurance companies are dissipating in the change, but the proposal appears to put taxpayers on the hook, specifically the rule states that "this proposed adjustment may increase the total amount of risk payments the federal government reduced the amount of risk order to seek." did you estimate how much more money taxpayers would have to pay to insurance companies under this proposed rule? alwaysrisk or door has been a part of the affordable care act, and what is anticipated for the first couple of years to be used for kora doors and risk for the new marketplaces. so we did put out a proposed rule.

we talked about the fact that we would look carefully at what the 2014lment is at the end of in order to determine going forward. we won't know anything about what that looks like until we get more enrolled. paxton rule says we cannot estimate the magnitude of this impact on aggregate risk corridor payments at this time. do you think it is responsible to put taxpayers on the hook for insurance companies losses? is responsible to make these payments without even estimating the cost? based on it will be what the risk pool looks like. we always knew that in the first couple of years the market would be attracting some customers and not attracting others and that there would be some risk in what we are hopeful for, as the affordable care act continues into maturity, is that we have mature pools.

>> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you, madam secretary, for being with us. i have some specific questions to ask about some of the promises that the president made to the american people as he was rolling out the idea of the affordable care act. , ifof those promises being you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. can you commit to the american people today that this is true, and that they will be able to keep their doctor? >> congresswoman, i think that as you well know in the private market, networks change on a constant basis. the president is not overtaking the private health insurance market. >> you're absolutely right, but

the promise that was made to the american people so that this piece of legislation which is now law would pass was that they would be able to keep their doctor. ask consumers will have the opportunity to pick and choose a network that continues their doctor. there's nothing in the law that -- --eir talk your >> insurance companies make network decisions day in and day out. >> but that was not the promise that the president made. did the president not make that promise to the american people? >> the private insurance market changes networks basically on a every >> why in the world did the president make that promise to the american people. >> he was trying to assure people that the law did not require them to lose their doctor. ask i don't believe that he was

reassuring the american people that they would lose their doctor. i think he was reassuring mf and people that if this law passed, that they would be able to keep their doctor. therefore today you are basically saying no, that this is not the case. >> i'm saying that there is -- again, this is the private insurance market where insurance companies develop networks and change them on a regular basis. people willmerican be able to keep their doctor if they pay more, according to ezekiel emanuel. >> they can choose a plan where their doctor is not available based on the kind of premium, the kind of deductible. they have a choice. >> that concludes our present.ng at the madame secretary, we will have some follow-up questions we will send to you and we asked you please respond properly. we have a couple of unanimous consent requests.

a letter from dr. julie welch, an emergency medicine physician and educator from indianapolis. without objection, so ordered. >> dr. being read referenced an offer to the president to for thea platform market exchange. i would like to submit his letter for the record and i will make this part of a question for the record that i will do in follow-up. >> without objection, so ordered. >> one is from my constituent that i referenced. another is the one that was referenced -- these are the different individuals impacted by the aca. the third one. >> without objection, so

ordered. thank you, madam secretary, for your patience, for responding to all of our questions. i remind members they have 10 business days to submit questions for the record. -- theyns they said should submit their questions by the close of business on tuesday, december 31st. thank you, madam secretary, for your indulgence. with that, without objection, the subcommittee is adjourned. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] [captioning performed by national captioning institute]

>> a live look outside the capital. the house is out for the night. they will vote on the defense programs bill. the capital light is still on. the senate is continuing to debate into the night. senator ronblican johnson speaking live on the floor. reports suggest republicans may use all the debate time allowed on the nomination to protest last month change in filibuster rules. on the nomination at around 1 a.m. eastern time. that thewrites unilateral rules change to

eliminate the filibuster, republicans refusing votes that would prevent them working weekends are the middle of the night. republicans plan to take hour- long shifts on the floor. if no solution is reached, said it will take a procedural vote for nominees on the equal employment opportunity commission. follow throughl saturday. our live coverage of the senate is on c-span2. is the train depot in plains, georgia, the oldest building here in planes. if you could imagine in 1976, the hustle and bustle of all the activities here in the campaign. you have tables and desk and phones going off and letters coming in and out of the area.

this is where rosalyn carter the brigade used during his run for governor. it was basically a way to get the word out about jimmy carter using volunteers going door to door, shaking hands, giving out literature. itwas a method so effective helped him get elected to the presidency. >> watch our program on first lady rosalynn carter at our website, www.c-span.org/fir stladies. monday we will start our encore presentation of first ladies season to, edith roosevelt to raise coolidge -- grace coolidge. quick house democrats and republicans react to the announcement of a deal on the budget. in about a half-hour, an oversight hearing on government surveillance programs.

kathleen sebelius's testimony about the healthcare.gov website. the house will vote tomorrow on a budget deal announced chair of thethe congressional budget committees. it will cut the debt by more than $20 billion. over the next half hour, reaction to the plan. first house democrats, then house republicans. >> good morning. we are going to try to move this along this morning, because members want to be at the national cathedral this morning for the celebration of the life of nelson mandela, so i'm going to ask all our members of leadership to try to be as brief as possible so we can yield the rest of the time.

mr. clyburn will speak as well and another member of the conference committee. i will just say one thing, some decent news, some good news. that is that today we have learned that some 1.2 million people in america have gained health insurance coverage as result of the affordable care act. over 360,000 under the marketplace, having applied directly to the marketplace and some 800,000 through medicaid. we know that another 1.9 million americans have already started the application process and simply need to choose which option they would like to have. some 3 million americans today will have health security, something they did not have before. surely, americans want health security, and they are signing up for affordable insurance under the affordable care act.

like the american people, democrats want to make sure the health security law works. we don't want to shut it down. now on the issue of hopefully no more shutdowns, we want to be able to start talking about moving forward on the budget so we can get to the real work of the american people, which is creating jobs, raising the minimum wage him and making sure all those who want to work in america have the chance to get a good job. we go straight to mr. van hollen and mr. clyburn. thank you, it is great to be here with my colleagues and fellow contraries. fellow colleagues. we made it clear as recently as 12-24 hours ago that the way the agreement was taking shape would absolutely not be acceptable to

members of the democratic caucus. wherenow in a form members of her caucus will have to decide for themselves. speaking individually, my view is that it is a small depth in the right direction, because we are able to restore many of the cuts that would otherwise take place as a result of the sequester, very deep and immediate cuts. it especially is good at restoring some of the cuts that in import taken place and domestic investments in our kids education, and science and research and places like the national institutes of health, law enforcement, and those kind of areas. this will help restore almost two thirds of the cuts that would otherwise have taken place in fiscal year 2014. and i believe that the way those cuts are paid for is not at all perfect, but a lot more equitable than it was 48 hours ago. our caucus will have to look at

the details as individuals, and obviously we will be doing that over the next couple of days. with that, i will yield to mr. s.yburn, one of the conferee >> i'm very pleased to stand here today in support of this legislation. , as mr. van hollen said yesterday afternoon, i was very ambivalent about where all this was going. that with mr.ed van hollen's very strong work and the sensitivities of senator murray, with whom i have worked .n these budgets

you remember the supercommittee. it turns out now this is the third time. you is in fact the charm. i want to say one thing. a lot of headlines going out in reference to federal employees. i want to emphasize now that nothing in this agreement affects current federal employees. has to do with federal employees who would be going to work for the government after january 1, 2014. nothing affects current federal employees. district so many in my , i don't want anybody having any anxieties between now and then. with that, i would like to yield to my colleague. >> thank you very much. as you know, many times when we all get here, everything has been said, but not everybody has

said it. i just want to add a few points. number one, as an appropriator, since this bill has restored two thirds of the dollars for now beiation, we will able to write appropriation bills. number two, i'm not happy with 2% cut to medicare providers, but it does not go to beneficiaries. number three, i think it is absolutely urgent that we restore and continue the unemployment insurance benefits. it is absolutely outrageous that we should leave this congress and go home for the holidays when too many people, over a million people, will not be getting their unemployment benefits. so overall, i do think it's important that we were able to work together, but i want to

make it clear, if we get the house back, it will be an even better bill, and when it comes to the national institutes of health, education, jobs, the economy, we can do better. but i think this is the best that we can do at this point. our confereeshank for their leadership and their effectiveness. there are opinions are important to our caucus. they are very familiar with the particulars of the legislation, and our caucus is just finding all of this out this morning. so they will carefully review the provisions of the proposal and ask questions of our conferees. i don't know where that will come down, because as you know, our budget that mr. van hollen was putting forth was quite different. it was about growth, it was

about investing in infrastructure and investing in early childhood learning. it was about ending the sequester, but doing so in a way that enabled us to support extend theell as to unemployment insurance. it is absolutely unconscionable that we could possibly even consider leaving washington d.c. without extending those benefits. some of you were at our steering and policy hearing a few days has in saw the impact it the lives of people who work hard and play by the rules. the work ethic is strong and respected in our country, and people losing jobs through no fault of their own in an economy that has people would not just degrees going to entry-level to havet to be able some income so they can stay in

their homes. it is a remarkable thing. you ask why would the republicans not just automatically do this? it is our responsibility to do this. again, i thank our conferees for their leadership am a their opinions are important to us. members will make their own decisions as to where we go with this, and again, we would have preferred something quite different, but we do recognize the value of coming to a decision so that we can go forward with more clarity on other legislation that we want to see. it brings $900 billion early on. if we had closed even a couple of tax loopholes, that would would not have had to tsa orser fees for

anything on the public employees. but i think that are conferees did a really good job in mitigating the damage to the federal employees in holding off much bigger cuts for them that the republicans had in mind. we are waiting to hear what the response is from the republicans. our members are now studying this and we do so very carefully as we leave here to go to celebrate the life and legacy and register our sadness on the loss of president mandela. we have a large celebration, he is still coming home from the funeral in south africa. you will have to stay tuned to hear just where our caucus will be going on this. >> i will be very brief. i want to join the leader in congratulating our lease saying

well done to our conferees as well. this budget deal i don't believe on the first blush is representative of the values of our overall conference in total, but there are very good aspects to it. theymember will decide how will vote on this as the leader has said. , i received ans e-mail this morning from a very good friend of mine who lives in long island. he has been out of work for quite some time. his unemployment is running out at the end of this month. he is married with children. he just worked out a deal with the bank that holds his mortgage that will allow for a $25 payment for the next five months. at the end of the five months, he has to come up with all of the mortgage payments that will be due. that is the kind of pressure that many americans are facing right now. they are losing their homes.

he asked me about food stamps. he said we have already seen a cut in our food stamps. this was before the holidays. not, asking me whether or as someone who is in the know, whether or not unemployment insurance will be extended. that is real life, that is a friend of mine. what is the answer to him and to his family? under the republican led congress, the answer so far has been no. unfortunately, it looks as though we will leave here this week without addressing unemployment insurance. it is unconscionable, and it is immoral. [indiscernible] >> we haven't even seen the finished product. we are hearing this morning that now there may be another amendment joined to it about sgr . it is interesting, it is

something we should do, but why wouldn't we do unemployment insurance if we are doing that? >> [indiscernible] to immigration, will we have to wait until next year? >> would can allow members to continue to answer questions, but we need to get over to the mandela ceremony. with that, we will close the press conference. thank you very much.

>> obamacare continues to wreak havoc on american families and small businesses. when we get to january 1, it will be clear that more americans will have lost their health insurance than will sign up under the new obamacare policies. this is not what the president promised the american people. he promised them they could keep the health plans they liked. that turned out not to be true. president promised the american people they could keep the doctor they have had all these years. that has turned out to not be true as well. time for the president to get serious about stopping this law before it reeks anymore havoc on american families, small businesses, and our economy. morning. we have obviously got a very full agenda this week in the house, the final week of the session this year. as the speaker said, we still have a lot of concerns, as have the american people, about obamacare.

zeke emanuel was on tv this weakening said -- this weekend saying when the president said you could keep your health care, you could do that by paying a lot more money. that is a broken promise to the american people. we have secretary sebelius coming this week, and would be interesting to hear her answer to why that is now what the president really meant. as you know, the budget chairman is here. he will discuss the details of the agreement with senator murray. i want to congratulate him on the hard work behind trying to get a deal in this divided government that we are in. the deal is something that encompasses deficit reduction, permanent pension reform for government employees, and it doesn't raise taxes. is consistent with republican efforts all along to try to replace the sequester with permanent savings that just make

a lot more sense. we also have up on the floor ,his week gregg harper's gabriella miller's kids first research act. gregg harper is one of our colleagues who has a child with special needs. he has been working very hard with peter welch to put this bill forward, which essentially provides a choice. do we want to spend taxpayer dollars to pay for political conventions, or would we rather pediatriconey towards medical research, which has been woefully unattended to in terms of our research agenda. gabriella miller is who the bill is named after. if you have not met her parents, hearst or he is quite inspiring. she is a young girl, 10 years old, who actually died about a month ago. county,rom loudoun virginia. about a year ago she was diagnosed with an inoperable brain tumor. if you have seen anything that she has said, or her parents

have indicated, when a child of nine years old is diagnosed with inoperable brain cancer, that child becomes an adult party quickly. she is a terrific inspiration to all of us. her parents are fighting hard. they have asked to be a heart of this process. they will be here in the gallery today, hopefully to move the ball forward on cancer research, medical research, especially for pediatrics. in thanking join our budget chairman for coming to an agreement. paul ryan again shows that looking at the numbers, we will reduce the deficit and not raise taxes. it has been a goal of republicans as we continue to move forward. we have lower spending for the first time since the korean war, year over year. tos puts us in a new path continue in that direction. those are the numbers.

on the other side, the president giving us a obamacare, let's look at those numbers. as of today, the administration projected that we would have 1.3 million americans who would sign up for obamacare. aboutne third have, 360,000. the more telling number is come the president told us that if you had your health plan you liked it, you could keep it. than 4 million americans have lost their health plan. as we go into this christmas season and the new year, more people will have lost their lost their health plan. as we go into this christmas season and the new year, more people will have lost their health plan that have signed up or got from obamacare. that is why it is time to remove it and change. >> uncertainty is the word i hear more than any other when i am out and about at home in kansas. more and moreom regulations, uncertainty about higher taxes, and uncertainty about unsustainable debt and the effects on our economy.

and of course, uncertainty about the president's health care law. we had a broken health insurance system to begin with that needed some fixes. but the president and the democrats who control congress at the time trust upon us is completely misguided and leaves american families struggling from uncertainty. can i keep my doctor? how much will costs go up? is the website working yet? is my information safe and secure? what is the next delay the president will issue? even volunteer firefighters are now concerned about this law in the impact it will have on the budgets of communities they serve. towns in my district operate on a very tight budget, and this is not anything they can accommodate. hard-working americans deserve better. they want fewer government mandates, more flexibility, and more certainty. >> i've never been this tall before.

what congresswoman jenkins was saying, the president's health care law is the wrong solution to address the challenges of health insurance access and affordability. it's the wrong solution for this economy. i have many constituents who have told me the same story that john ashe county told me. his insurance premium is going to increase 33%, but his hours at work have been cut. how is he going to pay for his health insurance? that's what he wants to know. furthermore, this is being felt all across north carolina in schools and community colleges, universities am aware substitute teachers and adjunct professors hours are being cut. for them, obamacare is threatening their take-home pay and hurting their career opportunities. , as congresswoman jenkins said, uncertainty is really facing people out there

and they would like some certainty. they don't know -- they know they're not going to be able to keep their plan. they know they will not be able to keep their doctor, but what other problems are they going to have? are we going to hear some answers from secretary sebelius today? families are very concerned about their budget. they are waiting for clarity in this area also from the administration that keeps waiting until the last minute, changing its mind, and announcing the next big delay. , and we need aty better plan. republicans have that. thank you. >> with got to find a way to make this divided government work. we think it is in our nation's interest to do that. that is why we sought to reach a budget agreement that maintained our principles and found, and ground. we have found common ground with

our colleagues on the other side of the aisle over in the senate. but the budget agreement does is help produce more certainty. it stops a potential government shutdown down in january and stops the potential government shut down in october. we think that is good for the country. at the same time, we want to make sure we are taking a step in the right direction for fiscal discipline. republican budget represents our ultimate goal and our ultimate vision to balance the budget and pay off the debt. we understand we are not going to get everything we want. what we want to do is take a step toward that goal, a step in the direction toward that vision. by having a budget agreement that does not raise taxes, that does reduce the deficit and produces some certainty and prevents government shutdowns, we think is a good agreement. it's also an agreement that gives congress the power of the purse back. for three years, we keep passing these continuing resolution

which is congress ceding its authority to the executive branch so they set the priorities. that is not right, that is not constitutional. we make a statement on behalf of , we finallyeduction focus on a portion of the budget that has been on autopilot for years, that is in need of attention. and we make divided government work. we feel very good at where we are with our members. we know that this budget agreement does not come close to achieving what we want to achieve on our ultimate fiscal goals, but again, if we can get a step in the right direction, were going to take that step, and that's why we are doing this. >> does this mark the end of the attempt to the fund obamacare? >> we want obamacare gone. one? because it is not -- why? because it is not good for the american people and their finding out it is not good for them.

[indiscernible] year tove worked all get our economy going again and to help produce better jobs and more wages. when the white house finally called me last friday about extending unemployment benefits, i said that we would clearly consider it, as long as it is paid for and as long as there are other efforts that will help get our economy moving once again. i have not seen a plan from the white house that meets those standards. >> [indiscernible] >> they are using our members and they are using the american people for their own goals. this is ridiculous. are for moreu deficit reduction, you are for this agreement.

>> one of the democrats talking points was that this deal is now better than it was 24 hours ago. ago that mean that 24 hours , it was a better deal for republicans? >> i'm not sure what that means, to be honest with you. nothing has changed. ofs agreement maintains 70% the sequester in the next year 92%a half, and it preserves of the sequester over the life of the sequester. the democrats wanted the sequester completely lifted, completely gone. we didn't agree with that. we are maintaining 70% of the sequester. we are paying with 85 billion dollars of mandatory savings to result in net deficit reduction. we think that is a step in the right direction. it keeps the budget caps intact. and by the way, it gets bipartisan agreement for sticking with budget caps.

>> last question. >> long-term unemployment is now double where it was the last time unemployment insurance was ended after a recession. does this actually hurt the economy [indiscernible] >> i outlined what i thought it would take to the white house. i've not seen any proposal from them. >> the commerce secretary says the budget deal is good news because it is one more certainty from government. here is what she told the politico for him. >> i am an optimist, so i think this is very positive news. regular order is something that is really important, and

frankly, it's very hard to run the government without a budget. a department, how do you know what you can and can't do if you don't have a budget? so this is really positive, and i'm hopeful they can come to resolution and that we can move or were. >> what does the administration hoped could grow from this? orderhink that if regular really takes hold, there is so much that we have to do. we have a very full growth agenda, whether it's around immigration reform, investment in infrastructure, our trade agenda, there is investment in innovation and our manufacturing initiatives. there's so much that we want to get done, and this is the first step. assuming the deal gets passed, and it looks like it's going to, we come back to 2014, what will be gifford about the

relations between the two ends of pennsylvania avenue -- what will be different? >> we have a lot we want to get done. there is a lot of commonality of purpose. i've been in office now little over five months. i have met with over 700 business leaders. what i know they want is more , andinty from government they are quite clear about that. that is an important part of their feeling confident in order to grow and invest in this country. we know if that happens, that is good for job creation. that is what is being asked of us. >> we want to welcome our c-span viewers around the world. this is about the budget deal being reached. the lead headline in the wall dealt journal today, brings stability to u.s. budget. you can get a little carried away and go a little too far on

what this deal means. it is not a big deal. does come as you were talking about, it evidences that there can be regular order. it means we can then proceed. a budget is a big deal. frankly, we have been living far too long, before i was involved here, without the kind of budget and ability to predict. imagine as a manager, where i come from, if you don't know what your budget is, you are not sure what the budget is for year or two from now, how do you know exactly what you can get done? so i do think it is a big deal. quick secretary of state john kerry and treasury secretary jack lew on the status of talks with iran. afterwards, republican senators bob corker and john mccain spoke with reporters for about 10 minutes. >> what kind of leverage to republicans have --

>> it is not republicans, it is republicans and democrats. they want it brought to the floor of the senate where we will work together and try to force them to do so. it is a recognition of the reality that parts of northern syrian border have been taken by extremists islam is groups. it directly attributes to our failure to help the people who are the moderates, the free syrian army. our failure to help them while 5000 has bullock amen, while planeloads of arms come in from hezbollahwhile 5000 came in. we have failed them, and it is shameful. obviously because of all this outside assistance that assad

has gotten the momentum on the ground. it is a shameful chapter in american history. >> [indiscernible] >> i hope there is, but i don't know. >> do you think this bipartisan deal -- senator graham was saying he expects a vote by sometime in january. how confident are you that you would be able to override the veto? >> i honestly don't know. that is too far down the road. it would be a powerful statement about the will of the congress. we are nearing the end right now. we wanted to wait until after this briefing before we introduced it. >> the argument the administration makes is, after six months, sanctions can of coors be reimposed. why act now?

what is your response to that? >> my response to that is we want to make sure that the -- understandsure that if we don't trust the interim agreement, that congress will act, and act decisively. they are months away, a few months away from the acquisition of a nuclear weapon. and they are continuing with their development of missiles and with weapons to deliver it. that,kes have been put on so there is no trust here. >> it sounds like some of you were persuaded by secretary kerry. >> i was not only persuaded, i came out with many of the statements that the secretary of state made as fax, i know are factually false because i just came back from the region. thank you.

>> i don't think anybody is anticipating anything is really -- i have no new information. it necessarilyy took place in a classified setting. i didn't come away with anything , additional knowledge. i want to make my position clear. i know there are lots of discussions about additional sanctions. my effort is not toward that end. thatt want to make sure iran honors the un security council resolutions that have been put in place already, the last one being negotiated in 2010 with this administration taking the lead. i want to make sure that at a minimum they adhere to that agreement before any additional

sanctions are alleviated. i'm more worried about the administration continuing to alleviate sanctions without actually causing them to honor the base agreement that is part of the un security council. that is really where our efforts have been. there are a lot of discussions underway. something that would be disappointing would be for that basically is a triumph of politics over policy. if that makes sense. i know things are still evolving. there may be a possible sanctions bill. it is fairly toothless. that is not my effort. ensure --is to try to the administration has already tilted towards the president.