>> both the obama administration and the american medical theciation are opposed to proposal by the house republicans. ont debate against at 9 a.m. the house floor. floridaer governor of and the sun of former senator and new jersey governor jon corzine was found dead in mexico city. those are some of the articles we will be going through this morning. ericirst, attorney general holder spoke yesterday here in washington on the issue of druging prison time for laws.

if adopted, this amendment would lower by two levels the base offense levels associated with various drug one of these involved in drug craft thing -- in drug trafficking crimes. reduceould modestly guideline penalties will keep in t.e guidelines consisten this straightforward adjustment to sentencing ranges, while measured in scope, would nonetheless send a strong message about the fairness of our criminal justice system. it would help to rein in federal prison spending while focusing limited resources on the most serious threats to public safety. zoe want to talk about with you this morning as we go "the washington journal."

the numbers are on your screen. we set aside our fourth line this morning. if you have been jailed for a drug crime, we would like to hear your experience. if you can't get through on the phone lines, you can also get through on social media at c-span wj. facebook.com/sees and there you can join the conversation there that has been going on. from "the new york times" this morning.

a little bit from "the new york times" article.

post" takes an different tack. here is their lead on the front pages morning.

he goes and tries to get a job. where is he going to get a job at? isn't that just perpetuating the

?roblem that is already there it does not make sense. we have to have alternative thinking toward people who do these things. when they get out, not to start them out in a bad position. i used to work for the california department of forrester. -- iranre a lot of guys flyer crews that were from prisons. they weren't bad people, they just weren't that bright and they did to him things and got in prison. having programs like that, a lot of those guys ended up getting out and working for the force. so, charles, you're living in a state where marijuana is legal. what about for other drugs? what if somebody was caught -- and a lot of this is for trafficking and manufacturing --

do you think someone whose manufacturing methamphetamines or heroin, do you think the same principles apply? not as much. if they are doing a cartel thing that is a different story. that is different than some guy out there is somebody using drugs and getting busted with a pound of marijuana and he goes to prison for five years. yes, of course. somebody out there manufacturing methamphetamine or -- orbuting harrowing, heroin. do yourrowi really want to crowd presence with these kinds of people? there are alternatives. supportarles, did you colorado's legalization of caller a? caller

caller: of course i did. it was evil that never came. it emptied our jail. mr. problem? no. is there more anything? no. in my believe, if you're going to smoke marijuana -- i asked a kid once in high school if it is hard to get marijuana. their statement was that you could buy marijuana on every street corner and math on every other street corner. here,t know anybody out nobody has spoken to is smoking it now that it is legal. it just makes it easier for the people who are already smoking to get it. host: thank you for your time. this is from the sentencing

project. the number of people in prisons 1980, and the yellow is 2011. you can see the increase in people in jail for drug offenses between 1980 and 2011. arnold is calling from roxborough, north carolina. you are on the "washington journal." caller: you say this is bipartisan with the congress that once the mandatory sentence reduced. guy to get out of .ail if you get a guy going for a job and there are 2500 people for

one job. host: we have such a bad connection, i'm going to have to and that call. texas governor rick perry spoke about this issue. back to thet to go president of the united states and attorney general. both recognize that what we have done in texas -- and i notice admitor them to admit, to the minimum sentencing guidelines. they are notg and working. there is a place that has implemented some programs that are making a difference in people's lives. economically it is making sense. recidivism rises. and is making sense. we want people to get their lives back. if we are really going to be

honest citizens of this great country, being able to give people a second chance is really important. the texas prison system, again, we are not perfect. we are moving towards perfection every day. we hope someday to attain it, probably won't. the fact is, that should be our goal. the idea that we lock people up, throw them away, never give them a chance at redemption is not what america is about. more from the bit "washington post" article on this.

rb is on the republican line. all, i have aof the tandem ofing criminal obama and eric holder. i will say that from the jump.

most of these crimes are committed in neighborhoods that hold a lot of minority population. look at the liquor store count compared to other populations in the city. i don't know how many times it has doubled. item -- unnatural there is a nonviolent crime when it comes to drugs. know if anybody has noticed, but we have gotten a real problem. it is like kids dropping dead on abuse.eet from heroin it is totally unprotected. host: when it comes to the mandatory minimum sentences, arbie, where do you come down? i don't think that the marijuana thing is really what we're talking about.

we are talking about other, harder drugs. in regardo such thing to the nonviolent crime when it comes to drugs. --host you notice we have got it. caller: i'd enough minimum sentencing for people who are is logical. to put them in the .ame cell people think marijuana is not a bad drug, you, but people who smoke where one like to get

high. that high will get old and they will want to change to something else, something harder or with euphoria, things of that nature. former new jersey governor's son dead in apparent suicide. he killed himself in a mexico city hotel. sources told new york post on .hursday, jeffrey corzine say he had been depressed recently. the cause of death was not released. another piece of news is morning. scott brown is set to run for senate for new hampshire.

joel brinkley, who was the son of journalist david brinkley, only 61 years old, died from undiagnosed leukemia here in washington. next call is ishmael in maryland.washingto there are more drugs being consumed and sold in inner-city rather than in the suburbs. that really isn't true. a lot of studies have proven that out. on the issue at hand, i don't particularly believe in mandatory sentencing programs

for small amounts of things such as marijuana. cocaine, heroin and all those other things are different. i think there needs to be interference and substance abuse programs and things of that nature. for marijuana, small amounts, i think it is ridiculous to throw people in jail for 378 910 years just for that. thank you very much. host: this is from the congressional research service.

it goes on down. you can see that a lot of the maximums for drug kingpins, 20 years to life. george is calling from tacoma, washington. tell us about your experience. have had al, i couple different experiences. i have family that has been through the court system and everything because of drug with myself.long i am not a medical marijuana patient. is thati see it

marijuana grows from the ground. it is just like a vegetable or whatnot. it is a natural plant. when he start adding chemicals in it, it is bad for your system. heroin,s for meth, speed, any of that stuff. along with even prescription medications. so, george, you are arrested for marijuana possession? .aller: no, but i have family members who have. do think using dealers should be treated differently at ? caller: yes definitely. william is calling from

memphis, tennessee. caller: i have a lot of different opinions about this. i am a former drug addict. i will be clean and 22 years this month. first of all, i think we jail too many people in america. secondly, when you look at drug majorin most cities, the reason that most people are selling drugs in those cities is lack of opportunities. if we would improve our educational system, if we would , a lot ofe job market people would not be salinger arrived. sellingerized. at the time i was doing it i was not a bad person. i used heroin and cocaine.

i never committed a violent crime and i live -- in my life. system kept offering the opportunity to get into recovery instead of minimum sentencing or giving me more time in jail. i would never have been able to be covered. the reality is if we consider .urselves a civilized country i visit the prison in memphis every month. i have done since 2006. the men that prime minister to are not people that belong in jail. they belong someplace getting help for the reason that they felt like using drugs. that is the reality of it. host: i apologize, were you arrested for use of drugs? caller: yes, i have been.

i was caught three times. host: you said you are offered the chance for recovery act of caller: yes, what they called in those days was drug diversion. did was, they required you to go into treatment. i will admit to you that their time for that to actually stick, but it did eventually stick. my1992, i was able to begin out of sobriety which has been extended to today. it will be 22 years this month. met hundreds if not thousands of other men and women that are in recovery. they are not bad people. i know there are millions of .eople i am breaking some forms of anonymity. i want to say one more thing. i am from new jersey.

corzine, who was the governor of new jersey, he mentioned his son committed suicide? the other thing we need to understand is that it is disproportional in a manner that we jail people who use drugs. forbid, i am, god sorry that what happened to him hepened to him -- because came from a family with money he did not have to go to jail. not just is that blacks but people who are poor are the ones who are in prison. that needs to change as well. we need to get away from this backward thinking that we seem to be trying to find a way to reinvent again. sayuld even go so far as to it would probably be better for us to not even have any of these drugs criminalized very we are already going to the method of

legalizing marijuana. that is not going to make me smoke marijuana. i do not smoke marijuana. dislike i don't drink or smoke cigarettes. just because her illegal does not make me do it. if i were a person that wanted to do it, making it illegal is not good to keep me from doing it. the reason there's something wrong with me, and is not because i am a criminal or they are a criminal, we need to follow some of the advice that we are being given from eric holder and other businesses of this administration and try to become more civilized, and stop trying to be civilized ourselves. host: thank you very much, william in memphis, tennessee. front page of the washington times is morning. this is their banner headline.

that is the article, washington times.com if you want to read the whole thing. back to your calls on reducing prison time for drug crimes as called for by attorney general eric holder. as we saw, governor rick perry and other republicans as well.

arthur in caller: corpus christi, texas on the republican line. agree: for once, i on something that some in the obama administration has said. anybody that gets busted for a few joints should have to be given the same amount of time as somebody busted with a couple of pounds. sentencings minimum has just been totally unfair for years. texas, we have a program in the prison system i -- is the felony

abuse program. you get busted, you get a chance to go through this program. it is a prison type of environment, but rather than just being imprisoned and doing through ahey take you and afterrogram certain amount of time, i don't know that much about it because i've never been through it, but after certain amount of time after you get out, eventually you have the opportunity to have the felony to be dropped from your record like it never existed. host: and arthur, you support that? isler: oh yeah, i think great that somebody's tried to help people that are having a hard time. i've seen what crack can do to

people. it is not pretty. you sir. right, thank michael in lakewood, florida. michael, what is been your experience with the criminal ? stice system and drugs caller: i have a felony conviction for drug confession -- for drug possession. now earned a few degrees. i want to make sure that i thank the gentleman from tennessee. he preached a lot of what i want to say about justice being about how much you can afford rather than just granting it to you as a citizen. i truly believe that a lot of our money could be used better on facilities doing with substance abuse rather than incarcerating these people. michael, did you spend any

time in jail? caller: one student of 29 days was as long as i spent. felonyhat is the conviction mean to you tried to get a job? caller: i have spent the last six years hoping to be able to at least get an interview. i've been applying for jobs for at least six years and nothing. i'm hoping that at least if i get my masters degree and mental health counseling, then i will be called by to help and substance abuse. that will be my experience and education at the same time. it is been terrible trying to find a job. when you are using drugs to every burglary ring are robbing? did you commit crimes of that nature? birds of a feather do flock together. that is what kept me from getting to the point where i felt like i was part of society

while i was in for use. you find yourself in a surrounding and then a lot of times an environment in which you are with people you shouldn't be with, but you are with them because they have so substance that you're looking for. thank you for calling in, michael. kerry says people who sell drugs make a lot of money. i doubt there'd give that up for a minimum-wage job. list is giveaway drugs to adults. -- ie says here is richard. maurice from maysville, kentucky. you are on the washington journal. we have watches

political thing going on with everybody trying to help everybody. doing what you have to do is great, try to get changed everything. it always comes down to the grassroots of it. -- it is not there, they won't go to jail. there is ban. drug abuse is a medical problem not a criminal one. silvio hampton says reducing prison time for drug crimes is a great idea. make room for the wall street crooks. chris says wall street corruption is not a crime. says congress should play it slow head in shame. is -- theinion

democrats must be in big trouble and need every vote they can get. call comes from texas. please go ahead. caller: i saw you on tv. line is definitely a between a substance user and a substance dealer. another thing i want to say is that it will definitely reduce a prison sentence for these people but then they replace it with something else. there are already a lot of people who want to go to prison. -- fromt to have those the go back to the house or be like,ood they can yeah. if you had me i would start with

giving people via sector maze. againstmotivate people having that. jonathan is causing from mickelson, new jersey. high, jonathan. imprisoned for only three days. this evidence could have been much longer for cannabis possession. when i was a kid, i was put on ritalin. ages 8-14. i was misdiagnosed with add. doctors are now finding it is a thehere always known that amphetamine was close to methamphetamine. it is very serious mental health usedquences, especially

when people are young and their brains are developing. i think it is ironic and tragic are asese drugs dangerous as amphetamines and they are given to kids against their will. growing adults are often not allowed to use substances on their own bodies that are at least as dangerous. as all or want to say. clinton pages4000 to be released. a second batch of four thousand pages of records from former president clinton's white house are slated to be released today. the records ranging from the 2000 presidential recount in florida to documents related to terrorism and the decade before 9/11. they will be available online at the clinton presidential library at 1 p.m. -- at 1:00 p.m.. lane calling from out doesn't, texas. lane, you are on the washington

journal. what a think about what attorney general holder had to say about reducing prison time for those convicted of drug crimes. thatr: i have been through puma system in texas twice. host: what were you jailed for? possession of methamphetamine under 20 grams. i was locked up in a room with 64 other people and just left there, basically. the corporations that have taken over the prisons in texas need to be looked at. guards are very unprofessional. ripe.ystem is

i'm 58. the young generation is locked up up a lot of gang members. if you disrespect them, and the ---host y age host: lane, what you think should happen to having been caught with methamphetamine? a violentm not person. i have never committed a violent crime. i know a lot of the young ones are in the for burglary and stuff. i never committed a burglary or fraud or anything like that. , i wassabled, retired

--d i didn't qualify for the the third time, i understand what they did. they wanted me to go down there and experience it. it was a waste of taxpayers money. host: have you gone back to using methamphetamine? caller: i am also a disabled veteran. no. if a person wants to get clean, they're going to get clean. program,sh the mentor -- theyid before, you want you to do things to get .hrough that

i just think that taxpayers money can be better spent. host: all right, lane. tweets in. washington post this morning has on their front page some comments. if you go to the washington post you can read that article in its entirety. new cia lawyer. here's a picture. her name is caroline cross. she is confirmed by the senate yesterday. she is the cia's new general counsel. governmentreer lawyer who has worked at the justice department's office of legal counsel. carolyn crassest of name. from chicago on our republican line. would you think general holder had to say what you think about

what he had to say? caller: its ok. offenders.violent , should be looking at getting amnesty so they can go to work. they need to redeem their lives. you have to be firm and fair. you do the crime, you may have to do the time. , give them a second chance and give them amnesty so they can go work, because otherwise the cycle keeps repeating. you have a young, nonviolent in this situation.

if they still have a mark on the record, i don't see it being listening time. if times, i don't know is within a randy or tried to kick the habit, anyway. in chicago, thank you for calling in. here's a little bit more from eric holder yesterday. if adopted, its amendment thed lower by two levels base offense levels associated with various drug quantities involved in drug trafficking crimes. ,his would be effective modestly reducing the guideline while keeping the guidelines consistent with current statutory minimums. continuing to ensure tough penalties for violent criminals, career criminals, or those who use weapons welcome in drug crimes.

the straightforward adjustment to sentencing ranges, measured in scope, would nonetheless send a strong message about the fairness of our criminal justice system. it would help to rein in federal prison spending while focusing limited researches on the most limited threat to american safety. living the very worst job i ever had so soon?

little tidbit from inside the government. dc, what dohington think about what the attorney general had to say? caller: i have had a lot of experience. i am an attorney in d.c. i represent clients who have had drug problems. i've been involved in the prosecution side in the d.c. government. comingstand where age is from. there's a certain amount of clinical correctness in this. addiction is costing this country more than we know. i don't think we have any idea how much it costs, it is billions. i do believe strongly that

people who sell addictive , unlawful addictive substances to teenagers are pregnant women have committed an act of violence. i've seen kids were 15, 16, they got hooked. the people who sold those kids those drugs have committed an act of violence. they have addicted teenagers and they ought to go away for a very long time. host: james are you on the defense side of prosecutorial side? i am an attorney out of practice. host: so you are defending clients. have a lot of clients, families and so forth. we have kids who are addicted the good happens is addiction is lifelong. i have seen it. is it family i represent, they have a beautiful 14-year-old

daughter. the kit is wonderful, and she got hooked on meth, from a good family. i think there is a real problem there. athink the person who sold math to that 14-year-old teenager needs to go away. teenagers are impressionable, they don't have the capacity to say no. they don't understand. they tend to be gullible. distributionk that in all cases is nonviolent. i think addicting someone is violent. you formes, thank calling in ensuring your point of view. georgia ontatesboro, a democrat line. i want to know who polices the police. down here in georgia, they have full reign of what they want to do. knows going to stop the police or sheriff's car. since i been here in georgia. and i was in pennsylvania, i

bought more drugs from law enforcement. bought my drugs from law enforcement. upot of them get wound getting strung out on drugs trying to get someone else involved. they didn't have all these things. they want a checking themselves. and they wound up getting strung out on drugs. georgehat is louise and are calling in. thanks everyone who called in this first section. the house is coming in at 9 a.m. this morning. for're working on something medicare payments. we will be leaving the washington journal at 9 a.m. this morning. meanwhile, we have two members of congress coming in in a minute. we have representative michael couple 10 from massachusetts. we'll be talking about financial matters.

and then rob woodall from georgia will be here. he is a member of the government reform committee. we'll be talking about lois lerner and the irs suit. on the weekend, c-span2 is hooked to the and c-span3 is american history tv. 48 hours of nonfiction books and 48 hours of american history, respectively, on those two, are two companion networks. for the last year or two, we have been visiting cities across the country to get some more local stories, some are local flavor. this weekend is tell as a florida weekend on book tv at american history tv. here is a taste. >> the location of tallahassee is fairly unique. it is not on a river, nor is it -- nor was it when it was built

on the main highway or anything. it is right in the middle of almost nowhere. the biggest problem facing oflahassee is our lack armored sector businesses operating here. we don't have any large industries. industry in the traditional sense of the word. we have two large industries here, government, state government, and universities. our biggest problem is trying to diversify that economic base. love seasons have that one company or two companies that are really there and they go to the big companies. we don't have that. .e'll see and aetna

we have a high magnetic lab, which is one of the world's largest magnetic labs. we have a great airport. to attract elements this. we are doing that. that was one of the first things that i focused on when i became mayor. it is attracting businesses to the city of tallahassee. we are getting there. >> c-span, 435 years bringing public affairs offense from washington directly to you. putting in the room at congressional hearings, white house events, briefings and conferences, and offering complete gavel-to-gavel coverage of the house, all as a private service. watch us in hd, like us on facebook and follow us on

twitter. >> washington journal and continues now. michael capuano is a democrat from massachusetts. he serves as the ranking member on the housing and insurance committee. we'll get to those issues in just a minute. congressman, i do know if you heard of for segment on "washington journal." we had attorney general holder say he wanted to reduce times for people are guilty of drug crimes. been a supporter of mandatory minimums. i do think we should have mandatory guidelines that require a clear and unequivocal explanation as to why they wouldn't be followed if they are not followed. i don't like mandatory minimums. it take away the concept that each of us are individuals and they treat everyone the same. i think they do burden the system. the concept is a good discussion

to have, i look forward to seeing the details. much --host: how much do spend on drug and crime issues? caller: quite a lot. it is one thing if you want to destroy your life. that is not good, but it is a whole other thing if you want to break into my mother's house to support eight difficult habit. it is a twofold thing. some drugs are much always lead to that situation, and there other drugs that usually don't read i think the distinction is important. it is not some moral thing. it is the impact on society that is the most important aspect of it. invited you here to talk about some of the financial issues that are going on in the country. what is the status of freddie mac and fannie mae?

guest: there still talking about it. that money has been paid back. we have not allowed them to count it as payback. if i loaned you $10, you give me $10 back and i said no, you still only $10. we are using it as a piggy bank. we have made virtually no progress in trying to reform it. everyone tries to do everyone is in agreement that we got out of line. we all agree that they need to be reformed. there's been no significant discussion on the house side as to legitimate proposals that have an opportunity of passing. there is a proposal that was passed on the financial services committee on a totally partisan basis that a been sitting around since our sober. they're not even brought to the floor because they don't have the votes. that doesn't mean they don't need any democrats. it tells you that it wasn't unreasonable proposal that never had a chance of passing, anyway. the senate now has two

proposals. today a slightly different and they present the real basic question, which is can we do this in a manner which helps the middle class? proposalsth senate have good merits to them. i think the house proposal at some point will have to come around to something a lot closer to one of those. host: the most recent senate proposal does away with the two. guest: that is fine. i don't think anyone wants to save them. i think is one basic question. that is whether the government should stand behind the bonds that support mortgages. for is a difficult concept most people. last time the government did not stand behind response was 1928. 1929, the government has in some form or other said that if the whole world goes crazy, not every mortgage in every person, but if the whole mortgage world goes crazy, we will come in and do something. that is exactly what we do with

fannie and freddie. in 1928, the average mortgage at five percent per year, here is the catch -- it required a 50% down payment for every mortgage. mortgage had to be repaid in five years. a 30 year mortgage was not invented yet. that was the result -- the result was that anyone listening who owns a home or pays rent understands that means. i don't know very many people who can afford 50% down a payment on any home ever. that is number one. if you could, the result of a five mortgage versus a 30 year mortgage, is raising them mortgage at an average of two percent times what that was. i think anyone who pays the mortgage note that means. same mortgage would cost you 4, 5 -- $4000, $5,000 or $6,000 a month. i don't know many people who could do that. host: that said, what should-year-old the in the mortgage industry?

guest: pretty much what they were when they started. that was the problem they were doing. they should not have done that. i don't think you have the authority to do that. i think people should of been held accountable. all that being said, if we can generally provide the same type of opportunity to fannie and freddie were doing for 70 years, building the middle class, everyone i know that owns a home, including me, could not have afforded it without the type of opportunity that fannie and freddie were providing. if we can get that, it is a relatively simple thing to do. it does mean destroying the two entities as entities, but creating something that looks comparable to what it did before without the ability to do the crazy stuff. to that.nate proposals the dude a little bit differently, but that is the underlying proposal. "washington post" this morning opines.

ideally, they write, government would get out of the mortgage --ured visitation business securitization business. what was reality? governmentally, the should do nothing in a perfect world. i never lived in a perfect world. i do know what for 70 years for and delta middle-class. i had the opportunity to buy a home 34 years ago. i am still in the same home. everyone i know, build any degree of what they had surveyed

by buying a home and staying there. little a oversimplification, but that is the basis of what most of us do. my children went to college because i was able to remortgage at home. i think that again, if you can show me any place in the history of this country where there was a middle class without government backing of the bonds, not individual mortgages, and done -- the moneys coming in were invested in a thoughtful, conservative manner, then i will listen. there's no history of that in the united states of america. at the good old days of the 1920's and not since then. in 2008, do think the mortgage crisis was handled properly by the federal government? it was not handled correctly getting into 2008. once it hit and one sits like this in the face, more or less, yes. i had problems with some of the details we did. i don't like the fact that we allowed some individuals to go

unpunished. i don't like the idea that we let some people get paid. in general, yes, it was absolutely necessary and appropriate. my district, some of the greatest universities in the world. during that time, i gathered several groups of the world's leading economists and asked them a similar question about what should i be doing. everyone one of them said we have to be doing something big and something fast. overall, conceptually the answer is yes, we did. we should not have gotten in the situation we were in. host: is homeownership a good goal? guest: as far as i am concerned it is. it provides stability in your life. your mortgage stays the same why your income in theory rises a little bit each year. homeownership to me is still the --t -- it is not a guarantee

education is the best thing you can get. the next best thing you can get is a good solid investment for your money. that is a home. most of us can afford. it would be massively could all enter at the internet very host: michael tweets in. our high prices for housing good or bad? good for people who own a home and bad for people like my kids who do not. it is always trying to find a balance. -- thece of housing government has not got much they can do. they cannot do zoning and developed in certain areas to increase and decrease the supply. that is a local decision. we can say whatever the price is, if you are close to being able to afford it. it is really the monthly mortgage.

i could never-- to buy a home cash on the barrel head. i have to take out a mortgage. is my nevere what going to be and can i afford that? the federal government has limited ability to impact the cost of housing. frompresentative capuano, "the new york times," they had a hearing for stanley fischer, lael brainard and jerome powell to join janet yellen on the fed. what is congress's role when it comes to the fed? how much control do you have? control, not much, oversight -- a lot. . frank, we -- dodd frank, we wheeled them back. circumstances" could open up trillions of dollars worth of debt, we close back.

if we find other problems, we will do it. the fed has a long history of relative success. that does not mean everything has been perfect. the economy -- everybody will tell you, every economist and every individual. in the equally shared slow improvement but everybody accepts that the economy is not heading down. most believe it is heading up. a little slower than we would like. the fed has played a role. host: do you agree with the ending of tapering? ?uest: tapering of qe yes. my hope is that it is done slowly. gotten intot have it, it would have been nice if people had had their eyes more firmly set. hopefully some of the things from dodd frank will prevent that from happening again. when you get out of a mess it would be nice to snap our

fingers and get out, it is going to take a slow time. numbers onll put the our screen. our guest is representative michael capuano, in his eighth term. he represents the 7th district of massachusetts. somerville, roxboro, massachusetts and 75% of bo ston. guest: you miss a couple, don't get me in trouble. host: if you want to call him, go ahead. annie, go ahead. caller: hi, how are you doing. i want to find out about fannie mae and freddie mac. about nothing ever said cinematic -- about fannie mae. our of america just sold .ortgage to some odd company

they refused to take my son's -- buying this home. it was set up to be taken out of the bank every month. he is a disabled veteran and is tax exempt. he has a fixed interest rate of 7%. even putting taxes on it, i do not know how because he is tax exempt. i have to mail the payments in now. they have to -- you're bank of america mortgage is now owned by a company called penny mac? let's see what congressman capuano has to say. guest: difficult to answer that with limited information. i suggest you contact your member of congress, they can walk you through individual

items. especially if your son is 100% disabled, there are special programs depending on how they got disabled and if they are officially 100% disabled. i suggest you contact your member of congress and walk through that with them. host: are homeowners or mortgage holders, are their rights protected? guest: some, not all. a contract between you and the person who loans you money. one of the problems in 2008 was that banks, relatively heavily regulated, were out of the mortgage business. the mortgages came from unregulated financial services institutions. they are subject to rest regulation and oversitght. there are some rights but it is a contract between you and the lender. muchcontract pretty controls like any other

contract, like your lease with tenants or a landlord. an agreement between you and the car company when you buy an automobile. certainly things that are in the contract, you have obligation to have to live up to. host: in art from bethlehem, pennsylvania. caller: how are you doing? -- now thatwould be science has proven that the third tower destroyed on 9/11, building seven, was brought down in a controlled demolition -- host: eric is one of those thinks building seven was brought down on purpose. john from wilmington, north carolina. your question for michael capuano. caller: good morning, c-span. i wanted to call and comment on how the federal government is incentivizing thanks to with the on people

loan guarantee programs. whether with fannie mae, freddie va, all these, programs. -- i will just use an example. if someone bought a house at the peak of the market for $200,000. down 20%, they got a loan for 100 $60,000. the value of that house drops to $140,000 and you lose your job. you go to your bank and say i am having trouble. can you reduce my interest rate or my payment? what can you do for me? the bank looks at you and they say that is cash money. if we can put this person out on take this, we can't house back. we do not even have to sell it for $140,000, we can sell it for half of that and we can turn the bill in to whatever government agency is backing that. host: your final question is --

caller: not only is the taxpayer difference,for the they are driving home values down to a point it has an effect on all americans. host: thank you. guest: i agree with most of what he said. i do not agree with the taxpayer being on the hook. the concept is right, when fannie and freddie failed, we took it over and gave it to an agency called the fhfa. we have had the same argument with the former administrator, mr. dimarco, for as long as we can remember. many of us thought people in the situation you just mentioned, there are other ways to help them. i kept arguing to take the 30 year mortgage, if they were meeting their mortgages prior to a 50 year it

mortgage. we were unable to move them. they thought it was fine and better for the economy to do the situation you are. theo have a new director of fhs -- we have a new director of a congressman from north carolina. most of the things you are the houses below water and situations you described, have been settled the way you mentioned. there are many of us that fought it. we are the minority voice. i do not disagree with almost anything you just said. in, didn't fannie mae pay back their government alone like tanks? -- government loan like banks? guest: i think we need to create a government agency to merge the two. freddie bothnd

paid back all the money they borrowed. , we have notawm allowed that as counting towards paying off their loan. there is a lawsuit by shareholders of fannie and freddie. fannie and freddie were created as government agencies in the 1980's. quadrant private agencies, the ndseral public -- pension fu would buy shares just like any corporation. shareholders have been denied the opportunity to sell shares at a reasonable amount or share profits fannie and freddie has had because the government has taken anevery penny. we did not do that with gm. i think once they pay their loan back, we should reform them or let them go. i personally think we should reform them. i actually think there is a

lawsuit, it has a very good chance of succeeding. that will show what the government has done is not appropriate. host: congressman, what is the difference between fannie and freddie? guest: it is the way they get the money. it is a technical issue. to the average homeowner it does not matter. different people qualify for different things. it is mostly in the way that they loan, they actually borrow money to put out two loans. you said earlier that without fannie and freddie you would not have been able to get a mortgage. i did notn though qualify for one of their loans, buy them existing, just like unions. when unions raise wages, they raise everyone's wages. freddie lowerd mortgage rates for a vast number of people, it lowers mortgage rates for everyone. i come from a high income and high-cost area, boston. the point.

by lowering mortgage rates, if anyone who provides the nonqualified loans, they have to be competitive. that pushes those rates down. i think that by providing relatively affordable, relatively affordable interest rates. in terms, the 30 year mortgage. you couldayments, have the greatest terms and the greatest rates but if your down payment is 50%, few people can afford that. to have all three of those. by having all three of those you cannot discriminate against people, you have a great opportunity to build the middle class. which is what america did for 70 years. until the people of fannie and freddie, in my opinion, decided to enrich themselves by finding loopholes. i think they went beyond what the law allowed. there was -- it was never what the people who created fannie and freddie or its supporters ever anticipated or would have

authorized. host: next call for congressman michael capuano comes from arizona, democrat line. caller: how are you doing this morning? the sameon is -- thing over and over again. in the 1960's, we dealt with the anon and jobs. the 1960's, we dealt with the vietnam and jobs. in 2014 it is iraq and jobs. why do the same problems keep going on? question that a is above my pay grade. i do not disagree with some of the things you said. i can't tell you what i tell my constituents, i can only answer for myself. i do not elect the rest of congress.

if i have the minority view, so be it. i am a child of the vietnam era. it does feel very similar. i am hoping we have finally, i thought maybe we had, we have learned our lesson when it comes to foreign adventures. tweets.a of tranquility guest: fannie and freddie are not government agencies. they have not been for 30 odd years or 20 odd years. greed is a human nature. not the solet is owner of that term. neither are they exempt. everybody i know has some degree of greed, that is why we have the laws and regulations. to control our human weaknesses. i want to be clear -- fannie and

freddie -- i think greed played a factor but they are not government agencies. fallacy.he big i wish i knew directly, i believe it was during the reagan administration. it was around that time. host: the same question we asked about the fed, what kind of and control does congress have over fannie and freddie? guest: very little. when we spun them out, we said do what ever you want to do. we gave them very general parameters. there was little oversight for some time. there were little problems. i was mayor and now i am in congress. if i do not hear about people's departments, things are going well. i only hear the bad things. no one picks up the phone and says social security was great. they pick up the phone and say they would not give me my check. when you do not hear bad things,

you do your best to oversee it but there is no motivation. there is motivation to check things when you hear something bad. i think congress did that. iadmit that people like me -- fully did everything i could to push up the percentage of home ownership the cause of the things i said earlier. it is a great path into the middle class. having seen what we have seen in loanssome of these no doc and people getting mortgages they should never have gotten, i think we all did not do our oversight as well as we should have. i would like to find a bill that would read provide the opportunity and the responsibility of regular oversight. host: ron tweets in. dodd frank is filled with loopholes. glass-steagall had to go to fuel homeownership growth. guest: i do not agree.

i voted to keep glass-steagall in 1998, 2000, whatever. glass-steagall worked. when things worked i do not see any reason to change them, but we did. the frank, i am one of original cosponsors of the bill to reinstitute five spiegel. i have another bill that would institute it through a backdoor way through a private market approach will stop dodd frank is full of loopholes. that is the nature of any legislation. the strongest bill we could pass but that requires making compromises in order to get the votes. ado think dodd frank was great step forward. if you allowed me to draft it, even barney frank or chris dodd, if you allow them to draft it without compromising, it would be different. many fewer, if any, loopholes. host: marshall, texas, kevin is

on the line. michael capuano is our guest. caller: thank you, congressman. you said that fannie and freddie are not government entities and they have been spun off. that is really, you know, not right. the government was backing down. they were backing them. investors knew that. guest: that is true. that makes it a government entity. i go on the side that we need to spin them off. i have two reasons. the first reason -- you mentioned that this yourself. you find it politically helpful if you can get people into homes. government controls things -- that is going to be one of the considerations -- that is a dangerous situation.

you mentioned before fannie and freddie you had to have a 50% down payment. times have changed. people's access to capital because of free trade, because of technology -- we have access to capital that we did not have 70 years ago. the phone right now and get a $50,000 loan from my credit card. simple as that. i think if you had freer markets in the mortgage industry, there would be competition and there would be banks. there would be less than 50%. host: kevin, i think we have got the point. guest: i could not disagree with you more. allou did that, that is well and good. some people could do it, i have high limits on my credit cards and i have a home equity loan i have not access in a while. that is the exception, that is

not the rule. what about young people? what about a 25-year-old who just got out of college with loans? of the cost of housing in places like massachusetts texas, there like are many more people in texas who have accessed fannie and freddie than there are in massachusetts. a higher percentage of the population. all your statements are thoughtful, but their academic. no situation in the history of --rica where your situation except prior to fannie and freddie. purely private market. it was very simple, do-it-yourself. the average mortgage in 1928 was 5%. down, 5 year mortgage repayment. could people buy homes? some people good, but not the middle class. i do not know your economic background or situation. theppen to think that

creation and the maintenance of the middle-class is the greatest success story in american history. it is the one thing we have given to the world war than anything else that is important. most other societies have two classes -- the rich and the poor. my family would have been in the poor category. provideallowed to ourselves the opportunity to enter the middle class which is a better lifestyle. i do not want to play without. we had a very long history of successful record until greed took over. bywas allowed to take over the lack of government oversight and by human nature. host: wild and wonderful tweets in. hard to have affordable mortgages unless you have a supply of affordable housing. that is a decreasing commodity. guest: correct. affordable housing is two things. a good social policy but it is also tied to the amount of housing, regardless of what term.

have sufficient amount of housing to meet the deed, then the concept of affordability disappears. like anything else. if i only have two coffee cups and i have 500 people who want them. and have 500 coffee cups only two people want them, i can make it affordable. we have been unable or unwilling, it is a big expense financially, to be able to create as much housing. there has been a good social concept that i happen to share that is is is a good thing for society to specifically provide provisions that provide affordable housing for certain economic categories of people who will never be able to buy their own home on their own. i happen to think everyone in america should have a right to decent, safe, affordable housing. that does not mean the taj mahal. that does not mean mortgages they cannot afford. it means there is a gradation

which is affordable housing. some people disagree with me. disagree, they have an obligation to increase the supply so people like me are not necessary. if there is enough supply, affordability takes care of itself. there is not enough supply, so there is an imperative to deal with that. host: michael capuano, ranking member of the housing financial services committee. another member of congress before congress comes into session at 9:00 a.m. , republican of georgia. a member of the government reform committee as well as the budget. ♪

>> unique challenges in defining the war in cyberspace. what war is, what hostility is. from a policy perspective we are trying to work our way through those issues. the tenant i think that are applicable is the fact that whatever we do in the cyber arena, international law will pertain. if we find ourselves getting to a point where we believe that down an armedg us conflict scenario, the law of armed conflict will pertain as much in this domain as it does in any other. i do not think cyber is inherently different in that regard. i think those sets of procedures

as a nation, have stood us in good stead and they represent a good point of departure. weekend, the senate armed services committee takes up intelligence and military nominations at 10:00 eastern saturday. a look at hillary clinton's political career. american history tv, from march 1964, martin luther king jr. saturday evening at 7:00 and 11:00. in the two weeks ago midst of a terrible tragedy on the potomac, we saw the spirit of american heroism at its finest. the heroism of rescue workers saving crash victims from icy waters. ouraw the heroism of one of

young government employees, a woman losehe saw her grip on the helicopter line, dived into the water and dried her to safety. dragged her to safety. [applause] >> more highlights from 35 years of house floor coverage on our facebook page. c-span, created by america's cable companies 35 years ago and brought to you today as a public service by your television provider. " continues.journal guest,ob woodall is our

a republican from georgia. a member of the budget committee and the oversight and government reform committee. he represents the 7th district in georgia. northeastern suburbs just outside gwinnett and forsyth counties. host: suburbs of atlanta. as the economy like? doing pretty well. there are folks who have taken a beating. if you are breaking ground on a new home in forsyth county, you coming inoffer bids as ground is being broken. we have great growth. host: what is some of the industry? guest: the service industry. fortune 100 companies in the area, cisco is headquartered in our space. folks ande industry folks commuting during the crazy snowstorm in atlanta.

those were my constituents. our programin talking about what eric holder had to say. talking about reducing prison time for drug crimes. what is your general thought process? i tell high school students if you go to california you will find the teamsters have unionized marijuana growers. can is something california experiment with. i do not think that is coming to georgia anytime soon. folks in my district look at penalties for drug use in d.c. and think what is going on? are those carveouts? the same not viewed as kind of crime here as it is in my part of the world. i wonder why the federal government got into criminal law. that is the province of communities and better handled locally where community norms can apply. i do not fault. experimenting in other states.

i think we are going to stay on the straight and narrow. host: you are a member of the government and oversight committee. you were at the hearing, the lois lerner irs hearing. what is your impression of what happened? not all have our best day every day. down some caffeine this morning so i would not get agitated. my chairman called ranking and said he was sorry. things will go differently. we are talking about a branch of the government going after american citizens for what they believe. even according to the instant -- to the inspector general's report. if you criticize the decisions of the government, you are more likely to endure scrutiny for your group's proposal. that is a serious charge. it is not a month ago, not a

year ago, this has been going on and on. jail. has gone to the fbi -- you cannot tell what is going on. . frustrated because you need the confidence your government works folks back home are frustrated because you need the confidence your government works for you. host: did what happened between darrell issa analyze d elijah cummings take focus off of lois lerner and the irs? with the media. they did not take the chairman's focus off. the second time lois lerner came before the committee. the first time, she pled the fifth. the president was saying there is not one smidgen of corruption leader ofhave the

this division of the irs saying i cannot talk about it because i could incriminate myself. host: what happens next? guest: we're still putting together information at the government oversight committee. we are having to use the subpoena power to get information. this isd think something that both sides of the aisle in all four corners of america would be concerned about. and yet we still have a tough time getting information. my counsel to everyone who gets in trouble is be honest about what is going on. let's clear the air as soon as we can and deal with it and move on. the irs has not been as candid with the committee as we would have hoped. you are not going to see the committee give up. redirect theo focus, but i tell you our chairman is laser focused on getting the american people answers they deserve. host: representative woodall,

what is next on the budget committee? guest: working through the numbers right now. the obama economy has 10cerbated debt for the next years to about $1.2 trillion in lost growth. balanceto find that to using the same proposals we used last year. we are going to do it. i'm not only sit on the budget committee, i serve as chairman of the republican study committee budget task force. moreually have a budget observant than the house budget. distinction you will see between the president's budget and the house budget is not a fact that he never balances and we do. not the fact that we are trying to pay down debt and he is not. we lay out big ideas and big solutions for the big problems out there before us. the biggest disappointment we had on the committee when the

president introduced his budget a month late last week was that there were no big ideas. he did nothing to save social security disability insurance, which is going bankrupt in 24 months. he did nothing to protect and ensure thedicare and solvency of social security or to pay down the debt that is a stranglehold on the economy. i understand why some people do not want to take on big challenges that the president gets paid to take on big challenges. take on big challenges and i am disappointed we do not have him as a partner on the budget. host: do you think there will be benefits and the relationship between paul ryan and patty murray? guest: i do. you see that in the conversations with chairman ryan. when we are having a conversation about what went right and what went wrong in december, he sticks to those commitments. this was not a bait and switch conversation.

this was a very hard, difficult conversation and they came together. look at what has happened. we have a farm bill, we were able to sort that out. we have a budget deal, at least for two years in th -- two years, passed. work on the to appropriations bills. i see glimmers of hope. not necessarily between the congressional and the white house relationship, but between the house and the senate. when i read my constitution, it is article one for a reason, the house and senate have a special obligation and the a special relationship. host: the end of march brings another deadline. guest: we are taking right along. i believe what you are going to see is a continued commitment to moving legislation forward. i do not think you see folks dodging anything, they are

embracing the ability to do something. 2010, no one came to sit on the sidelines. everyone came because they wanted to make have decisions to make a difference. the: isn't the debt limit, short continuing resolution running out at the end of march? guest: we are funded through the end of september. do not worry between here and september. host: i apologize. representative rob woodall from georgia. joseph in new york, democrat, first caller. caller: good morning. i would like to know why blockingns are progress in this country. you are against raising the minimum wage. you are against extending

unemployment. you are against every progress. meantime, you guys are living a big life. to guys are going all out destroy them this country. that's not right. guest: what i have learned in three years with the voting part of my district, i thought folks on the other side of the aisle were out to destroy the country. what you believe about me i believed about the democrats. i learned everyone loves this country that we have different ideas about how to make this country better. you talk about on a plummet and i will tell you i am committed to every american accessing -- you talk about unemployment and i will tell you i am committed to every american accessing the unemployment they have paid into. wagealk about the minimum and i will tell you i do not want to see the minimum wage

raised out of washington. we have the highest use unemployment rate the country has ever seen. that is the wrong direction for america. raising the minimum wage at the federal level will exacerbate that. 34 states have already raised the minimum wage above the federal minimum or are considering legislation to do so. raisingt your community the minimum wage to anything you would like it to be. we will find out if that works and if it does we will adopted in georgia. we willstroys jobs, look to georgia. host: unemployment insurance? thet: we are committed to 26 weeks. i read they have an agreement on the senate side, five republicans and five democrats. we do not have that on the house side. what i hear from employers back home is the longer folks remain on unemployment the more difficult it is to get back into the workforce.

if you have not worked for two years is it because no jobs were available or because your skills were not up to the task. getting folks back into the workforce should be our priority. folks getant to help unemployment checks, i want to help them get paychecks. host: mitchell, republican in maine. you are on "washington journal." caller: good morning. guest: the morning. caller: thank you for your vote raising the debt ceiling. i also appreciate the ongoing work with your revenue reform. thingsly doing the right trumps politics and peer pressure for you. theill congress face scientific evidence of the building seven and the world trade towers -- host: that is our second call this morning. the building seven, 9/11.

we have already talked about that. we have not given you a chance to answer. we have several callers who talk about building seven being pretty blown up -- being pre-blown up. fan of lettingig science speak for itself. i am not an engineer. i've read the same reports you do and i come to a different conclusion. i do consider that a settled matter. host: bill king tweets in. we elected obama. to ask you about that. the largest item in the medicare.s budget is the second largest item is social security. the third largest item is economic growth. it continues to taper and will be interest on the national debt. think about that. the third largest item in the

federal budget would be paying interest on the national debt. i don't think anyone voted for the president to have interest as the third largest item. it is the fastest growing item in the budget and doubles as a percent of our economy over the 10 years of his budget. you elected president obama because you believed in his big ideas for tackling big challenges that face this country. this budget does not seem to reflect any of those. i would welcome a conversation with the president to do the big things and the difficult things that make a different place of your family -- in the lives of your family. host: irs scandal is worse than watergate, liberal media will not talk about it. next call comes from grace in new york. i was so angry i forgot what i wanted to say. congress is a mess. you keep on downgrading your

-- your president. he is your president, too. you are making us the laughingstock of the whole entire earth. you keep knocking the man. we are not getting anything done. you are saying you are there to do the people's work, do the people's work. host: we got your point. i appreciate your frustration. having been on the job for three years, this is not what i expected. aboutht be frustrated different things. let me ask you to do this. let's not paint congress with one brush. there are different members and there is a house and a senate. if you are looking for hope, vice president kerry promised the ukraine $1 billion in loan guarantees on march4.

introduced legislation in the republican house to follow through on that promise on march 5. we passed that on march 6. te still has not moved forward on legislation to fulfill the vice president's promis. se. vice president's promie together as a nation. i am an american first and a republican down that list. host: answering the previous tweet. potusted for gop house, serves congress. down innate race georgia. have you endorsed any candidate? of great have a lot men and women and we will be well served. it will answer some of the questions about who we are as a party. georgia is a good republican state.

we have republicans from across the continuum. it will be a great place for the nation to watch to see who we want to be. host: representative woodall spent 16 years on chapel hill, a chief of staff to john linder of often do thisould program. what is former congressman linder doing? guest: he is enjoying a well-earned retirement and spending time with his grandchildren and wife. he has one of the biggest mind , writing and commenting on issues. trying to move the debate for. obligation as citizens. host: tom from pennsylvania. caller: to follow up on the call for government reform. let's have legislative district reform. i doubt we are going to see

that. my one-year-old could be the house republican gop the local operatives and get the majority with the way those districts are drawn. restoringn, how about the pay cut that we took when the bush tax cuts expire. be done now. you talk about people going to jail. nobody went to jail after the financial crisis, they got a bailout. where's my bailout? guest: a lotto. asking where their bailout is. i hope we can agree that we are not in the bailout business. i would rather talk about how we can stop a bailout. are right about redistricting. i was doing a town hall meeting last week and a lot of folks -- and walked fulks through the districts. we have one of the 5 most republican districts in the

nation. the five most democratic districts are gerrymandered worse. district,no's president obama that 97% against mitt romney. both ends ofem on the spectrum. i would be happy to work with you. host: in 15 minutes you will start a debate on the doc fix for medicare payments. guest: this is why i tell folks do not believe anything i tell you will happen 10 years from year.t will happen this this was a provision that started in 1997 and has never gone into effect. it was intended to prolong the life of medicare. congress has put it off. this measure we are going to consider it looks more like a

permanent fix than anything we have ever seen before. we ought to either enforce the law or repeal the law. that is true with immigration policy and the president's health care bill. it is true as it relates to medicare. we have not been enforcing this law. host: pat is a republican in south carolina. you are on "washington journal" with congressman woodall. caller: good morning. you are on the oversight committee. guest: yes, ma'am. any wasteu never find the government has until the press comes out with it. get moneyou ever back from the department that wasted? why are you looking at their budgets before they have the money to waste? why are you catching them in line item budgets? before we lose it. look: pat, i want you to

at not just where the line items in the budgets are today aware where they are projected to be this year. spending and federal agencies is at its lowest level as a percent of our economy in my lifetime. when i have in him congress, we have reduced the spending goes agencies have been doing. $1.91ere spending trillion, we are taking their spending down. do not havetee we that authority. that is in the appropriations committee. they have been doing a great job. our responsibility is .dentifying problems i could not be more proud of darrell issa and the way he has been targeting issues. when he finds a smidgen of corruption the president does not believe exists, he goes after it. with our limited resources, we are doing everything we can to solve the problems.

-- tax reform. what did you say? efforthe has spent more on fundamental tax reform to anyone i have seen in decades. i am a fair tax guy. i want to replace it entirely with a consumption tax code. what dave camp has done is he has laid everything out ahead of time. it was not in a closed cigar smoke filled room under cover of darkness. he laid out for all to see. we will end up with a better proposal. my constituency would prefer the fair tax but they would take anything over what we have today. we need more economic growth. i do not want to cut wages, standard of living, air quality, but we can fix tax code. the fair tax repealed the income employment, state and gift taxes. a single national

consumption tax of taxable property or services. what are the political realities? we have more cosponsors on the fair tax than any other fundamental tax reform bill in congress. they are continuing to be added every day because it eliminates every exemption in the tax code. there is no reason washington would support it. we have cosponsors because citizens back home support it. it would be the largest transfer support back home. i had some boy scouts in my office yesterday. william, chris, campbell, declan , we were talking about their opportunities and responsibilities in the future. every time we add another penny in debt, we trade responsibility by transferring that authority back to folks by taxing not your productivity by your consumption.

we will provide a new level of opportunity for youngsters. we have stolen it from them with national debt. host: tweeting in. low does voting to repea obamacare for the 50th time create jobs? , the question is how does obamacare destroy jobs. i see that every day back home. i see that and slower growth in our economy in every metric that comes out. repealing obamacare refuels all those burdens and regulations that destroys jobs. i am not the only one who sees a it, smiley. the president keeps putting off regulations until after the next election. his own health and human services department tells us 80% of small business policies are going to be canceled under obamacare. is something the president

does not want to see happen before the next election. i wish he would work with me to repeal that. smiley,t uncertainty, ask any business man or woman, uncertainty is a job killer. the president amplifies uncertainty with every delay he unilaterally imposes. host: tony, rhode island. caller: thank you for c-span. i am a career -- i am a korea vet. politicians give us a lousy $20 with social security. grocery, gas, everything is going up more than 1.7%. this president is terrible. i am independent. they do keeps saying not take money out of social security, that is a lie. reagan took $2.5 million. with the equipment we have today, what is going on in

washington, we already know money has been taken out of social security. you cannot say it has not. it has. it is a sham. this: i was talking about last week, we know how to solve social security, there are not that many levers to pull. taxes, raise the level of taxation are raise the amount of money taxed. you can change the qualifications, 66, 67, 69. there are not that many levers to pull. we should not have social security recipients 12 months away wondering if this is the year social security is going to go bankrupt. we know what the problem is and we need to come together and do that. the best thing we can do other than get the economy back on track is to provide permanent certainty that social security will be there. have the men and

women on both sides of the aisle to do that and i hope we have the leadership. host: freelancer tweets in about tax reform. guest: i do not know what you mean by class warfare. the power to tax is the power to destroy. if i decided to tax all purple pies, there would be no purple pies left. now, we tax productivity. we destroy productivity because we do. if you have enough money to buy a mercedes, you have enough money to help make this government go round. aat is why i support consumption tax. income tax burdens people trying to move up the ladder and escape poverty. consumption tax taxes those people who have already escaped oupoverty. i am all about the latter. i care about can you make

tomorrow better than your today. we live in a land of opportunity. doing?ow is john boehner fan of johna big boehner. he has a tough job. we have elected 435 ceo's to conserve on a giant committee together. john boehner, i do not love the results but i love the way we get them. he believes in individual members and he believes, imagine believes that if you allow ideas to come to the floor vote,low an up or down that the best ideas will win. it is so easy for the speaker of the house to believe you are the smartest person in the room. that is not john boehner. he says america is going to be better at the people's voices are heard through their 435 representatives. it is messy but it is the way

this country was designed to work. a speaker who believes that my constituents' voices are important. host: ronnie from new jersey, democrat line. caller: hi. you turned down a caffeine fix? you are wonderful. it is the same old thing, broadbrush. are un-american. i think you are close to being a good old boar. i hear the same thing from southerners -- host: what is a good old boy? caller: he knows what it means. good old boy. southern boy, proud of their heritage. you stop people from voting and stuff all kinds of down there. this president took over from a war criminal that put this country in such a hole.

i would like to see any republican do as well as this president has done. aknow certain constituents, guitar owner who i will not mention, has called this man a mongrel. guest: i appreciated the warm way you opened the call. i think we ought to be able to disagree on ideas without being disagreeable. i can't think your ideas are terrible while believing you are a good human being. district i have more first-generation americans than any other republican district in the country outside california or florida. rights arek voting being trampled in my district i will tell you the option. i cannot get folks to the po lls fast enough. my counties is a majority minority county. what you are saying is true of

the state of georgia before i was born, not today. if you love faith, family, and believe in education and community, you can call yourself a republican or a democrat, it does not matter. you will be with me at the ballot box. i want everyone who believes in this country to get to the polls. i am never afraid of your ideas. i am afraid of apathy. if we can have a battle of ideas this country is a better state. in georgia we see more voter turnout than we have seen in decades. host: congressman, is immigration going to come to the house floor this year? guest: i hope it does. what we have is a trust problem. i had a serious conversation with some thoughtful folks. i said what can we do to get this process moving. they said we cannot. if we can negotiate a deal, the president will choose not to enforce the party does not like

and enforce the part he does like. this lack of trust, we have to overcome. we can if we begin with border enforcement and interior enforcement and changing the rules on the books. people in my district that have been trying to get into america legally for more than 20 years. their number has not yet come up. if you want to bring your sister in from mexico legally you had to apply in the 1980's for your number to come up legally today. let's not pretend this is a who camenly of folks here the wrong way. we have a problem with folks trying to get here the right way. if we could build trust by solving those problems that we can agree on, i am certain we could create the momentum to solve those problems we do not yet agree on. host: what about the dream act? the house, cantor in

second in command, a big believer in moving legislation did not haveldren any choice in this matter. we should welcome them into the country. thoseround at some of young people. you'll find folks that you would be proud to call your neighbor. who you will be proud to be a citizen beside you. ordinarily, our immigration willy-nilly.nd of there is no thorough investigation of who you are going to be and how you are going to turn out. in my district, we have valedictorians in our high schools. we have opportunities to say you are amazing, we want you to be a part of what we have going on. here is my standard -- if you are going to put your hand over your heart and swear allegiance to this country, forsaking all others, if you have something you want to contribute and take advantage of that opportunity, i want you to be here.

it is absolutely true that we have got to take care of the folks who are trying to do it the right way. ' heartstand why folks are touched by children in these circumstances, but families have been separated for decades trying to come to the land of opportunity. from georgiaodall has been our guest. the house is coming into session, debating and working on the doc fix for medicare payments. have a good weekend. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] house will be in order. the chair lays before the house a communication from the speaker. the clerk: the speaker's room, washington, d.c., march 14, 2014. i hereby appoint the honorable reed j. ribble to act as speaker pro tempore on this day. signed, john a. boehner,

speaker of the house of representatives. the speaker pro tempore: the prayer will be offered by our chaplain, father conroy. chaplain conroy: let us pray. compassionate and merciful god, we give you thanks for giving us another day. during the upcoming week of constituent visits, give the members of this assembly insight, inspiration and industry to work for the good of our country. sustain our citizens with your power that they might be true to the highest and best they know and are able to achieve. as members visit with those whom they represent, may solutions that work toward the betterment of all in our nation emerge in open and respectful conversation. may the assurance of your love and the presence of your truth abide in all our hearts and all our homes and may all that is done be for your greater honor

and glory. amen. the speaker pro tempore: the chair has examined the journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to the house his approval thereof. pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1 the journal stands approved. the pledge of allegiance will be led by the gentleman from oklahoma, mr. mullin. mr. mullin: please join me. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the speaker pro tempore: the chair will entertain up to five requests for one-minute speeches on each side of the aisle. for what purpose does the gentleman from oklahoma seek recognition? mr. mullin: to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman from oklahoma is recognized for one minute. mr. speaker, time and time again we have been reassured by this administration that obamacare is working.

but when i talk to my constituents in oklahoma's second district, this is not the case. when i read the news headlines to discover yet another delay in obamacare, this is not the case. even this week, this administration was unable to i'm up here u know and i'm reading talking points to you that you've heard over and over and over again and yet we all know that obamacare is an absolute failure. we all know that, the media knows that, this president knows that and yet he continues to force it down the throat of the american people. just because it's his signature piece of legislation. what's sad, what's sad is that this is just one of many things that has made this president and his administration an absolute failure. and what's unfortunate is the american people are the ones that's having to pay for his

mistakes. i, for one, i've had enough. mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> i ask permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you very much, mr. speaker. i rise today in honor of the life and legacy of a very positive man, my friend, earnest j. reyes, who passed away recently at the age of 73. mr. ruiz: i know his legacy will endure. a native of california, he was dedicated to the california real estate community and used his knowledge to help families thrive homeownership. he co-founded the hispanic real estate professionals and advance for the spanish language services and documents for hispanic homeownership. he was an exceptional public

servant. i extend my sincerest condolences of his wife of 50 years, pa trishia, along with his daughter, denise and three grandchildren. mr. reyes was an inspiration and i know his loss will be felt by many, including the 29th congressional district. i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. thank you very much. i yield back the balance of my time, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. for what purpose does the gentleman from minnesota seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. paulsen: mr. speaker, last saturday i had the opportunity to celebrate the cold winter in minnesota by getting together with hundreds of others and jumping through a hole in the ice and into a freezing lake. while some may think that many minnesotans consider this normal recreational activity in the winter, it raised money for a worthwhile plunge. it raises millions of dollars

for the special olympics programs. this important funding allows more than 7,200 special olympic athletes in minnesota to grow and thrive through a variety of competition. i want to thank our state's law enforcement for organizing the plunges, channel 9 to support this cause and events, to all those who pledge their support for the participants and of course those who are crazy enough to jump through a hole in the ice. mr. speaker, i want to offer and congratulate the support for the special olympics, something that's truly life changing for the participants and their families and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. tonko: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today to honor and celebrate the nation's girl scouts. this week more than 100 years

ago, juliette lowe officially registered the girl scouts' first 18 members. since that time the girl scouts' experience has enriched the lives of millions of girls, their families and our communities. i am especially proud to highlight the hard work of if lisha -- felicia dodge from glendale, new york. she is helping to create a sustainable sewing program at a local school in haiti. felicia's project hones the skills to run a sustainable business. her hard work and certainty her involvement will send over 600 pounds of materials and supplies to the school. i applaud felicia for her thoughtful and certainly inspiring endeavor. on behalf of the citizens of the 20th congressional district of new york, i thank the girl scouts of northern new york for their commitment and for their service to our communities. with that, mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for

what purpose does the gentleman from tennessee seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, today i rise to honor america's teachers and i do that because i spoke with my 17-year-old son who's a junior at silverdale baptist university and he was asking me about teachers. i had three middle schools and two high schools in my own career. mr. fincher: and i told my son how important teaching is. just think about it. all across america -- my fleischmann: as i told son how important teaching is. just think about it. education is critically important, whether it's in the private sector, in the public sector, it's so critically important that we get it right. and teaching is such a noble profession. so i wanted to rise today, mr. speaker, and just say thank you to our nation's teachers.

keep up the great work. keep inspiring our young minds so that we can continue to move ahead as a great nation. thank you, mr. speaker, and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from illinois seek recognition? without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. ms. kelly: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today to talk about the thompson correctional -- ms. mrs. bustos:: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today to talk about the thompson correctional facility. since it was built by the state of illinois in 2001, for more than a decade, the people of my region have been thirsting for the jobs and the economic opportunity that the opening of this facility would bring. yesterday, we received very good news that we've been waiting for for a long time. this was delivered to us from the bureau of prisons, which announced that they will designate the funding to activate the thompson correctional center. this investment means

construction can soon begin. it means that workers can soon begin competing for good-paying jobs and it means that northern illinois will no longer be home to an empty prison. when fully opened, the thompson correctional center will add 1,100 jobs to our region and will add a $200 million annual economic impact. the prison's activation will not only be good for our economy, it will also generate a sense of pride among the people i serve in the surrounding communities. we finally will see a dormant facility put to good use. thank you, mr. speaker, and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from missouri seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, president obama and the administration has taken the uber presidency to a whole new level. time and time again we have

seen president obama stretch the constitutional limits of the office. when president obama simply disagrees with the law, he just ignores it. mr. speaker, no person is above the law. the house of representatives is committed to living by the constitution and holding the administration accountable. the enforce act will give congress the ability to bring a lawsuit against the president for failing to execute our laws. mr. smith: the faithful execution of the law act will require any federal official who is not enforcing a federal law to report to congress on the reason for nonenforcement. mr. speaker, the enforce act and the faithful execution of the law act uphold the constitution. these bills send a clear message that no one is above the law and will not have the constitutional be disregarded. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one

minute. mr. mcnerney: mr. speaker, i ask my colleagues to support the research being done at the department of defense and to reating tubular sclerosis or t.s.c. they have tumors in organs that can cause serious health problems. i had the opportunity to meet with people affected by this illness and understand how critical it is to continue research while scientists develop a cure for t.s.c. funding the department of defense t.s.c. research program is essential in developing new clinical treatments and breakthroughs for the disorder. in addition, this research has applications for other medical conditions such as traumatic drain injuries, combat and sports injuries. t.s.c. research breakthroughs will likely also have applications to some specific cancers. by committing support and

funding for this important research, we give hope to those living with t.s.c. and other chronic illnesses to help them move long and healthy lives. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> i ask permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. california is suffering from its worst drought in at least 35 years, maybe as much as 400 years. mr. lal if a: -- mr. lamalfa: we can't let that be a cause for inaction, indeed. the good lord helps those who helps themselves. it's time to build. it's been time to build for a long time. the type of water storage that moves california ahead and supplies farms, cities and environmental needs. we have this opportunity in a project long waiting our

authorization, the sites reservoir in the part of glendale county, an area that i represent that i used to represent in the state legislature and mr. garamendi is representing now. we are moving forward with the authorization for the funds and to complete the study. some say it will take seven or 10 years to get it done. had we started seven or 10 years ago we'd be right near completion so we need to start today and the people will thank us seven or 10 years from now when we get this done. we'll introduce this hopefully soon. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today to highlight the military transition support project, an innovative program to ease the transition for recently discharged veterans as they return to civilian life, which i helped launch last month. each year over 15,000 service

members are discharged in san diego and around half will choose to stay there. over the past year we have worked with our local veteran leadership, our navy and marine commanders and the san diego community to create a central system to help service members navigate through their transition. this unique effort will improve the quality of life for service members across san diego. the program will begin in the last year of service and will give these dedicated men and women access to resources and continuous support throughout the transition process, beginning while they're still providing by housing. the program has the potential to serve as a model for military communities across the country and it represents a groundbreaking collaborative effort where the military nonprofits and private sector stakeholders can come together in the cooperative spirit as a hallmark of san diego to get our veterans to work. thank you, mr. speaker, i yield back.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, pursuant to house resolution 515, i call up h.r. 4015 and ask for its immediate consideration in the house.

the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 4015, a bill to social le 18 of the curity act to repeal the medicare sustainable growth rate and improve medicare payments for physicians and other professionals, and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: rsuant to house resolution 515, the amendment printed in part b of house report 113-379 is adopted and the bill as amended is considered as read. the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. 515, the amendment printed in part b of house report 113-379 is adopted and the bill as amended is considered as read. the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. pitts, the gentleman from california, mr. waxman, the gentleman from michigan has camp, and the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, will reach control 15 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from pennsylvania. mr. pitts: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and the form lal which medicare

reimburses physicians. since 2003, congress has voted 17 times for temporary patches doc fixes to avert ever larger cuts to providers. the uncertainty of the s.g.r. threatens doctor's ability to continue practicing medicine and accepting medicare patients, and endangers seniors' access to care. absent congressional action, providers face a 24% cut on april 1, 2014. to stave off this cut, we can either pass another patch and kick the can down the road again, or we can repeal this flawed formula for good. today's bill, h.r. 4015,

s.g.r. ly repeals the and replaces it with payment reform policy that has been agreed upon by the bipartisan leaders of the energy and commerce, the ways and means committee and the senate financs committee. as chairman of the energy and commerce health subcommittee, i have been working for the past three years on legislation to permanently repeal the s.g.r. and i am very pleased that on february 6, 2014, we reached a bipartisan, bicameral agreement embodied in today's legislation. unfortunately since then senate majority leader reid has refused to negotiate with us on how to pay for this package. so we have brought forward h.r. 40125, which is fully paid for -- 4015, which is fully paid for by delaying implementation of

the individual mandate, a policy supported by both republicans and democrats. the bill enjoys more than 100 co-sponsors, and the support of over 700 national and state provider and stakeholder groups. so i urge all my colleagues to vote for h.r. 4015 to ensure that our seniors have access to the doctors they know and trust. thank you, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. waxman: mr. speaker, to start the debate on our side, i yield to the gentleman from new york, mr. engel, for two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york is recognized for three minutes. . engel: i thank my friend from california for yielding to me. mr. speaker, i rise in strong opposition not to the policy before us but to the poison pill pay-for attached to this much needed s.g.r. repeal and replace legislation. i support the bipartisan,

bicameral agreement contained in h.r. 4015 for numerous reasons. there is almost universal agreement that the sustainable growth rate is a flawed formula and therefore congress has been left to temporarily patch physician reimbursement for far too long. this bill permanently repeals the s.g.r. and provides physicians with a small increase in pay for the first five years. i want to see our physician work force fairly compensated, providing high quality care to our constituents. the s.g.r. fails to adequately do this. this legislation incentivizes physicians to focus on providing quality care instead of the high quantity of care. finally, while this has always been extremely expensive to permanently repeal and replace the s.g.r., it is now estimated to cost less than $140 billion. this is less than half the cost of what it would have been a few years ago. while the cost remains significant, i believe that it is imperative we permanently fix

physician payments now. that is why i am so furious republicans are wasting valuable time by parring this much needed legislation with yet another ridiculous affordable care act repeal vote. after more than 50 repeal votes, i think it's clear to everyone where both democrats and republicans stand on the affordable care act. we don't need another repeal vote. the current s.g.r. patch expires in 17 days. we should be focused on finding bipartisan pay-fors to permanently fix the s.g.r. instead of having republicans push through yet another bill that will surely die in the senate. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized. mr. pitts: mr. speaker, at this time i want to yield two minutes to the gentleman from georgia, one of the co-chairs of the doctors caucus, who has contribute add great deal to accomplish -- contributed a great deal to accomplish this bipartisan agreement. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia is recognized for two minutes.

mr. gringry: today we vote to repeal the sustainable -- mr. gingrey: today we vote to repeal the sustainable growth rate. a formula flawed from its beginning and its run its ugly course. as co-chair of the house g.o.p. caucus, i would like to thank the energy and commerce committee, especially chairman upton, ranking member waxman, health subcommittee chairman pitts, and ranking member malone, and especially member of the doctors caucus, vice chair dr. michael burgess. and the ways and means committee and senate finance committees and their staffs for the tireless work to produce a policy which will help to ensure that seniors continue to have access to quality providers. included in this legislation is my bill and it's called the standard of care protection act, and it provides much needed clarity to the practice of medicine by confirming that federal quality incentives are no substitute in a medical

malpractice case for the standards of care developed by specialty societies and determined and practiced by physicians. this is an extremely important determination that will provide fairness to both patient plaintiffs and doctors. with this vote today, we take an important step toward replacing the flawed formula. while at the same time protecting americans by delaying the individual mandate of obamacare by five years. while the current administration continues to add delays when it's politically expedient, this policy gives certainty for individuals that they won't be taxed or fined, mr. chairman, for not complying with a law they can't afford. this may not be the final version of the bill, but it's time for the senate to pass their own version and appoint conferees. s.g.r. repeal is too important for both seniors and our

doctors, and we have come too far for this policy to not reach the president's desk this year. mr. chairman, would you yield me 15 additional seconds? mr. pitts: i yield 15 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman may proceed for 15 second. mr. gingrey: let me just say again, we have come too far for this policy to not reach the president's desk, and i mean this year. the senate majority leader needs to come to the table, let's find a suitable path forward, let's repeal this unsustainable physician payment policy, and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. waxman: mr. speaker, i'm pleased at this time to yield two minutes to the gentlelady from the state of colorado, ms. degette. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from colorado is recognized for two minutes. ms. degette: thank you, mr. speaker. every year sometimes more than once a year since 2003, congress has had to step in to prevent a

cut in physicians payments. with input from a wide variety of stakeholders, we have tried to work together for many, many years on a solution to the flawed system to the sustainable growth rate formula. until this year, we were out of luck and the price tag for fixing the formula was ever increasing. the underlying legislation that we consider today was 11 years in the making. i am very proud to co-sponsor this bill because it's a compromise solution for the formula we agreed on, but sadly, sadly the majority has prescribed a bitter pill to swallow for passage of this important bill for patients and doctors. instead of coming to the negotiating table to discuss mutually acceptable ways to pay for this bill, the majority has decided to pay for -- by delaying important provisions of the affordable care act. everybody knows that this provision is a nonstarter, and it's a nonstarter in the other

body, and in my caucus right here in the house. because of this shortsighted tactic, the republicans have almost guaranteed that we are going to need yet another short-term s.g.r. patch before the current one expires on march 31. this is bad for the doctors of america. this is bad for the patients of america. let's get real. let's fix this problem for good. you know, mr. gingrey just recognized that this bill is not going anywhere. so let's sit down. let's do what we did with the s.g.r. itself and let's figure out how to pay for it. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields. mr. pitts: how much time on each ide. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from pennsylvania has 10 1/4 minutes remaining. the gentleman from california has 11 minutes remaining.

mr. pitts: mr. speaker, at this time i yield one minute to the gentleman from florida, mr. bilirakis, valuable member of the health subcommittee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida is recognized for one minute. mr. bilirakis: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today in support of repealing the s.g.r. formula. the s.g.r. cuts will reduce doctors' compensation for treating medicare patients by 24%. h.r. 4015 repeals and replaces s.g.r. with a merit-based incentive payment system. mips, that pays doctors based on quality not volume. paying doctors based on quality incentivizes physicians to be as efficient and effective as possible in keeping their patients healthy. mips is fully paid for by delay of obamacare's individual mandate. a tax on americans to force them to purchase more expensive

health care that doesn't meet their needs. this bill will provide doctors who treat medicare patients with certainty incentivize and reward doctors to keep seniors healthy with better care and provide individuals relief under obamacare. support our seniors, our doctors, and fairness for individuals under obamacare. i urge my colleagues to support h.r. 4015. i yield back. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california. mr. waxman: at this time, i yield two minutes to my good friend, the gentlelady from california, mrs. capps. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from california is recognized for two minutes. mrs. capps: thank my colleague for yielding. mr. speaker, i have long been a supporter of a permanent fix to the sustainable growth rate or s.g.r. the flawed s.g.r. harms providers and consumers alike and keeps us from true innovation in the health care sector. but for too long the conversation has ended with everyone recognizing the problem but no one willing to find a

middle ground to fix it. instead we lumber from patch to patch, kicking the can down the road with peace meal delays or fixes here in congress such as we are doing today. and these agreements overwhelm let the issue linger, causing more instability in our communities while the cost of a fix continues to rise. and that's why i have been so proud to be part of crafting the bipartisan, bicameral s.g.r. fix policy. this policy provides a positive payment update to our providers, pushes us toward a system rewarding quality, and fixing the gypsy, ensuring the providers and others will finally gain accurate medicare reimbursement. but today this process, bipartisan process is being derailed once again by tying a delay of the individual mandate to this policy, the house majority has poisoned such a bipartisan process. access to health care for more than 50 million seniors and persons with disabilities is a serious matter. and these partisan games could

very well end our nation's best shot at amending a bad policy. so i urge the majority to pull this bill, go back to the negotiating table with all of us, and help us fix medicare provider payments once and for all. i yield back the balance of my time. . i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields. the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized. mr. pitts: mr. speaker, at this time i'm pleased to dwreeled one minute -- yield one minute to the gentleman from nevada, dr. heck. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from nevada is recognized for one minute. mr. heck: thank you. bill. in support of this seniors' access to health care is the flawed s.g.r. formula. we have been so close in a bipartisan, bicameral way to ensuring our seniors have access to the health care providers of their choosing and now when we are so close is not the time to derail the progress made by controversial pay-fors. i will vote in favor of h.r.

4015 because of the policy changes it represents. i ask my friends on the other side of the aisle to vote aye so we can send this bill to the senate, and i call on the senate to pass legislation that includes the agreed to policy provisions with a pay-for by their choosing. then, let's go to conference and fix the s.g.r. once and for all. it will result in predictibility for our seniors. and passing s.g.r. reform is the fiscally responsible thing to do. the longer we delay, the more it will cost. let's give seniors the peace of mind they deserve, that they'll -- piece of mind they deserve, and let's pass h.r. 4015. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. waxman: mr. speaker, i yield two minutes to the gentleman from new jersey, mr. pallone, who is chair of the -- who is the ranking member of the health subcommittee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized for two minutes. mr. pallone: thank you, and thank you, mr. waxman. mr. speaker, today the

republican leadership once again chooses politics over substance and what's good for the american people. the current s.g.r. patch will expire on march 31 at which int medicare's cut will be 24%. we all know that the s.g.r. formula is flawed. after 10 years of patching these cuts, after wasting $150 billion, enough is enough. it's why we began last year seriously looking at this issue and we came up with a bipartisan, bicameral solution. in fact, it was quite the lesson in legislating, particularly we ended up arriving at a consensus bill on the s.g.r. so i ask the republican leadership, for what reason have you poisoned this process with an unacceptable pay-for? this bill will pass today and go nowhere. it will not be taken up by the senate. it will not be signed by the president. you have single handedly in my belief stomped on months and

months of hard work and effort by my colleagues on both sides of the aisle and our staffs. late night, weekends, hard compromises. we all saw the greater good in finally getting a replacement for the s.g.r., but instead of working with our leadership, the republicans turned this into the 51st vote to repeal the a.c.a. and you'll leave thousands of americans uninsured. the pay-for is a poison pill for something that we agreed on in terms of the substance of fixing the s.g.r. so, you know, you could have picked other ways of paying for this. i think we're close to a consensus on the pay-for, but instead you put this poison pill, you waste valuable time that you'll basically do nothing. we only have two weeks left. let's defeat this bill today, sit down over the next two weeks and come up with a pay-for that makes sense, not a pay-for that simply repeals the

affordable care act, which is working well. more and more people are signing up. i had an enrollment event this weekend in my district. people are signing up. don't destroy the process. we have a good s.g.r. fix. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized. mr. pitts: mr. speaker, at this time i am very pleased to yield two minutes to the distinguished chairman of the energy and commerce committee, one of the chief architects of this bill, mr. upton. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan is recognized for two minutes. mr. upton: well, thank you, mr. speaker. i first want to commend republicans and democrats for getting the policy right. this is a tough nut to crack. 51-0 in our committee led by joe pitts, dr. burgess, the doc caucus, mr. waxman, mr. dingell, mr. pallone. we worked long and hard to get the policy right and we worked with the other committees to do it as well. the difficulty we always knew was going to be on the pay-for. and i would suggest this -- we

want to work with the senate, we want to get this thing done. the pay-for is the toughest part. let's go to conference. let's work with the senate to get a pay-for that can work. now, we know that there's a deadline coming up at the end of this month, and as we look to try and find a pay-for, let me go through some of the other delays that this administration has already done. individual mandate delay, americans with canceled coverage due to obamacare, delayed. individual mandate deadline for purchasing coverage, delayed. individual mandates for non-a.c.a. compliant plans, delayed by the administration. annual limit requirement, delayed. m.l.r. requirement, delayed. m.a. cuts through demo bonus money, delayed. employer reporting, employer machine date, high-risk pool closure delayed. out-of-pocket waiver for group health care plans, delayed.

verification of eligibility for exchange subsidies, delayed. nondiscrimination requirements for employer coverage delayed. subsidies only through the exchange delayed. shop employee choice delay, delayed. shop online purchasing, delayed. healthcare.gov delayed. this was not ready for primetime. we've said that from the start. if the administration has decided to delay these things, almost two dozen, why not delay this too? and why not use the savings then, not only to help the physicians, we've got to think about -- 130ekds more? mr. pitts: i yield 30 seconds to the gentleman. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for 30 seconds. mr. upton: this is not only to help our physicians, it's to help our most vulnerable, our seniors, because if we don't reimburse our docs, the close sign is going to come up where they -- where they go for

services. they're going to be denied the coverage that they have paid taxes for, that they expect to have and yet another broken promise will be there. if the administration can delay these things, why don't we delay this? why don't we use the savings, then, to pay for a program that works? and i would suggest that we vote for this, work with the senate to get this done. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. waxman: mr. speaker, i want to point out that none of the delays that mr. upton indicated on that chart would as a result in 13 million people to lose insurance coverage and would raise premiums 10% to 20%. this is not a delay that we can agree to. it hurts the affordable care act, and it's a betrayal of our working together in a bipartisan basis to resolve this problem. we worked together on the policy, but we were never

brought in to work together on funding that policy. at this time i want to yield to the gentleman from texas, mr. green, two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized for two minutes. mr. green: thank you, mr. speaker. i thank our ranking member for yielding to me. i rise to express strong objection to the decision to use the affordable care act's individual responsibility requirement to pay for the s.g.r. reform. this move hijacks a thoughtful solution to a problem that's been harming medicare beneficiaries, providers and our budget for years, and it turns it into a political stunt. this decision is a poison pill and nothing more than -- more partisan politics. congress has overridden the s.g.r. mandated cuts to medicare physician payments each year since 2003. year after year, these temporary patches have been costly and disruptive. reforming a system is long overdue. the temporary fixes of the s.g.r. are losing situation. the money still has to be

spent, but only to just maintain the broken status quo. the bipartisan, bicameral s.g.r. bill is the closest we've come to fixing this problem once and for all and this decision gets us further to that goal. repealing the a.c.a. is a game we played now 51 times. holding s.g.r. reform hostage to destroy the a.c.a. and denying millions of americans access to care is disgraceful. the a.m.a., the texas medical association, the california medical association and the american people deserve better. in order for our health care system to work, americans must have insurance. delaying or repealing the requirement that individuals obtain coverage would drive up premiums and leave millions uninsured. again, this is purely a partisan pay-for proves there's not a sincere effort to finally enact s.g.r. reform but rather just another political game and i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized. mr. pitts: mr. speaker, i'd like to ask unanimous consent to submit for the record a letter from the texas medical

association in support of this legislation. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. pitts: and i'd like at this point to yield one minute to the gentleman from indiana, dr. bucshon, another member of the doctors caucus. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from indiana is recognized for one minute. mr. bucshon: thank you, mr. chairman. mr. speaker, i rise in support of this legislation. as a practicing physician for over 15 years, the majority of my patients were medicare patients. i know firsthand how flawed the s.g.r. is. by not repealing this flawed system to remain in business many doctors across america will be forced to limit the number of medicare patients that they see and many may refuse to see medicare patients altogether. failing to act or voting no on this legislation will limit seniors' access to their doctors. this will be especially dangerous in rural areas where there are already physician shortages. it's time we finally solve this problem and ensure that medicare patients have access to their chosen doctors. i urge my colleagues to stand up for all the seniors in

america and support this legislation. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. waxman: mr. speaker, i yield this time two minutes to the gentleman from north carolina, mr. butterfield. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from north carolina is recognized for two minutes. mr. butterfield: thank you. mr. speaker, i rise in strong opposition to this bill. you know, this began as a bipartisan effort, but predictably, this has deinvolved into nothing but another -- devolved into another but another repeal of the affordable care act. 2.4 million people have signed up for health care and the numbers are covering. we want to repeal the sustainable growth rate because the s.g.r. in current law is anything but sustainable. we are demanding more out of our doctors and health care professionals. we are asking that they operate with maximum efficiency to play their part in reining in health

care spending, and they deserve the same from congress. unfortunately, my republican colleagues don't share that view. that's why they've offered a pay-for that they know, they know will be completely unacceptable to most democrats and certainly stands no chance of passage in the senate. the president has even said he would veto this bill and rightfully so. the american medical association, which represents most of the doctors throughout the country, and i'm disappointed that the texas medical association is at variance with their national association, but the a.m.a. and the aarp and a dozen other organizations representing health care providers and hospitals and seniors have decried republicans' partisan tactics. they don't like it. we have five legislative days before the last s.g.r. extension runs out on march 31, five days. should republicans not come to their senses in time, i want doctors to know that a nearly

30% cut to their reimbursements should be laid squarely at the feet of my republican friends here in the house. doctors need predictability certainly so they can best serve their patients. if a permanent solution to the s.g.r. is not reached soon, doctors will be forced to make tough decisions about which patients they will see and those they can no longer afford to see. thank you for the time. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized. mr. pitts: may i inquire of the time left on each side? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from pennsylvania has 4 3/4 minutes, and the gentleman from california has 3 1/2 minutes. mr. pitts: mr. speaker, at this time i'm pleased to yield one minute to the gentleman from tennessee, dr. roe, another co-chair of the doctors caucus. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from tennessee is recognized for one minute. mr. roe: i thank the chairman. mr. speaker, this physician rises in strong support of h.r. 4015, the s.g.r. repeal. this bicameral, bipartisan compromise both preserve seniors' access to medical care

and give physicians certainty for how they will get paid for their services. this lays the groundwork for a gradual transition to a system that rewards value instead of volume. the house, by passing h.r. 4015, will take a big step toward the permanent repeal of a flawed formula that's hampered doctors since 1997. we can't allow the process to stop here. i encourage our senate colleagues to pass a bill as quickly as possible so we can move into conference and finally repeal -- find the mechanism to repeal this bill. i would like to thank the members of the staff, the committees for their tireless effort on this bill, particularly my friend, dr. mike burgess, who has long championed this reform. i encourage my colleagues to support h.r. 4015, and mr. speaker, the american medical association covers less than -- represents less than 20% of the physicians in this country. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. .

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california. mr. waxman: continue to reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from pennsylvania. mr. pitts: mr. speaker, at this time i'm pleased to yield one minute to the gentlelady from north carolina, mrs. ellmers, another important member of the health subcommittee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from north carolina is recognized for one minute. mrs. ellmers: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today in support of h.r. 4015, the s.g.r. repair. this has been a long time coming and i'm very excited to be part of it. i want to see this legislation move forward. i want to agreed and disagree with my esteemed colleagues across the aisle. this does boil down to patient care. this will negatively affect our seniors if we do not solve this problem for medicare reimbursement. it is patient access. it is the core of this issue. however, when we speak about association such as the a.m.a. or american medical association, we are talking about a group who only represent about 11% of physicians across this country, and that number decreases every

year. and there's a reason for that. they are not representing doctors in this country, and their voice is not as strong as it once was and should be. so with that, mr. speaker, i thank you for this time and my colleagues for this important message today. i hope all members support the s.g.r. reform. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: does the gentlelady yield? mrs. ellmers: i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. waxman: mr. speaker, i yield myself two minutes. this should be a moment of bipartisanship where we finally fix this sustainable growth rate in medicare physician reimbursement. none of us think -- it's supportable. doctors are always facing the peril of a deep cut if we don't patch it up or fix it permanently. it's time to fix it permanently. we work together in a bipartisan

basis in our committee and came up with a policy to replace the s.g.r. the ways and means committee and the senate finance committee followed us and they did their approach, and we all worked out one uniform approach with the idea that we are finally going to end this nonsense of threatening the doctors that take care of medicare patients. this is an issue of patient access to medical care that has been prom musted -- promised under medicare, yet the republicans are now insisting we pay for the permanent fix. well, this has come up many, many times. sometimes we pay for it, sometimes we didn't pay for it. but we always made sure that there was a fix on a bipartisan basis. instead, today the republicans without talking to us, they wanted to talk to us about the policy but without talking to us

are trying to pay for this by hurting the affordable care act. what they are doing is putting a partisan poison pill offset, an offset that would cause 13 million people to lose insurance coverage, and would raise premiums by 10% to 20% for everybody else in the exchange. they have to know this is not acceptable. we can't support it. and they are now coming here to the floor saying that there's some attempt by the democrats to undermine our policy agreement. well, let's stop blaming each other. let's get to work. and resolve this problem and vote down this bill. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized. mr. pitts: mr. speaker, may i inquire of the minority how many speakers they have left? do you have any more speakers? mr. waxman: one more person. mr. pith: i reserve.

mr. waxman: you have one speaker. we'll yield back the balance of our time. mr. pitts: at this time, then, mr. speaker, i yield the balance of my time to dr. burgess, the prime sponsor of this legislation, who's worked tirelessly to achieve this day. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. pitts: remainder of my time. mr. burgess: i thank my friend from pennsylvania for yielding me the time, chairman of the subcommittee for making this possible to bring this bill to the floor today. i want to thank chairman upton of the full committee and ranking member waxman of the full committee for also making this possible. it has been a lot of hard work getting us to this point. chairman upton talked about delays. i would point out there has been yet another delay, a delay of the closure of the risk pools because, let's be honest, the affordable care act is not ready to take on those people who have pre-existing conditions.

so i felt it necessary to keep the risk pools opened for another additional length of time. i want to talk to my friend on the democratic side of the aisle, particularly want to talk to those who have only been here one or two terms. the last time we had a bill like this on the floor of the house, democrats were in charge. mr. waxman, i think mr. dingell was chairman of our energy and commerce committee, and he brought a bill to the floor, h.r. 3961, which was an s.g.r. repeal bill. this bill had already been rejected by the senate, so it had no chance of going anywhere. this bill was not paid for. the policy was awful and would have given us two s.g.r.'s instead of one, but nevertheless that bill came to the floor. it only garnered one republican vote. i was -- garnered one republican vote. i was that vote. i was that vote because i thought it was important that the nation's doctors heard that we were willing to work together across party lines if need be to solve this problem for them. i wanted to preserve the process going forward.

ladies and gentlemen, the bill you have on the floor today, h.r. 4015, is not the destination. it is a key that keets you through the door to get -- key that gets you through the door to get that destination. the policy has been out there for all to see. we have awaited for anyone from the senate side who wanted to talk to us about negotiating bipartisan pay fors. radio silence. i don't know what rule 14 is over in the senate, but it's it's apparently pretty important. the majority leader on the -- in the other body has brought this bill up under rule 14, but they were doing nothing before for four weeks. this policy languished without them picking it up. now that the house is moving, now that the house is moving a bill and would likely pass the bill today with a decent pay for that is bipartisan because 27 democrats voted for this very pay for last week on the floor of this house. in fact, it was unanimous if we were exempting firefighters or veterans from the individual

mandate in the affordable care act. this is a bipartisan pay for. it has passed the floor of this house in a bipartisan fashion. it is ready to go. we call upon our colleagues in the other body, use whatever senate procedures you need to, but get this done because the clock is ticking. the clock is ticking towards march 31. we all know what happens to the nation's seniors on that date. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. burgess: i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, is recognized. mr. camp: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. camp: i rise today, mr. speaker, to strongly support h.r. 4015, the s.g.r. repeal and provider payment modernization act as amended. the ways and means committee and energy and commerce committee and senate finance committee have worked in a bipartisan manner to develop a permanent physician payment fix repeal. years of hearings, discussion drafts, and ongoing dialogues with stakeholders have resulted in h.r. 4015, a bipartisan, bicameral agreement on s.g.r. replacement policy. this bill has over 100 co-sponsors, has the support of 18 members of the house doctors caucus, and 600 national and state organizations representing

physicians and other professionals. and there's a reason for all of this support. h.r. 4015 has a lot to like. it repeals the outdated s.g.r. formula and gives seniors the certainty that they'll have access to their doctors. it incentivizes bet ircare and better results for seniors that rely on the compare program. and it breaks the cycle of uncertainty for doctors and their patients, providing permanent relief and improving how medicare pays doctors. we must not let this opportunity pass by. time is short. if we do not act, in just two weeks doctors will see a 24% cut in their medicare reimbursement, jeopardizes seniors' access to care. but we must safeguard taxpayer dollars, and that's why we pay for permanent repeal by delaying the health care law's individual mandate for five years. americans across the country are facing higher costs. losing the coverage they have and like and seeing smaller

paychecks as a result of obamacare. last week the administration announced it would continue to expand certain exemptions from the individual mandate for two years. this proposal would extend that further, would extend further what the administration has already -- is already doing and give all americans relief from the mandates and penalties of obamacare, it's only fair. i urge all members to support h.r. 4105. mr. speaker, 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 michigan, mr. levin, is recognized. mr. levin: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. levin: what's going on here? the republicans are bringing up a totally partisan bill to thwart a bipartisan bill. they are tossing aside common ground for barren ground.

another affordable care repeal vote. they are throwing out an historic bipartisan breakthrough to permanently end and replace the broken medicare physician payment formula. once again turning to totally partisan politics. the breakthrough achieved by our committees would permanently replace the deeply flawed s.g.r. formula with a system designed to build on delivery system reform, reforms that move medicare physician payments toward a more accountable value driven system. the underlying policy agreement is broadly supported by both provider communities and beneficiaries. but today's exercise is opposed by groups representing seniors, doctors, health plans, and others because it guts the

affordable care act through a five-year delay to the individual mandate. what would the result be? according to c.b.o. and the joint task committee, the republican bill would increase the number of uninsured americans by 13 million. what's more the bill would raise individual market health insurance premiums by 10% to 20% for those who remain insured. last week we saw the 50th vote. this is now the 351st vote to undermine the -- 51st vote to undermine the affordable care act. so much for good faith and so much for good will. instead of working to find common ground to finish the job fixingpartisan solution, a problem in our health care system, house republicans are taking once again a cynical step in a very familiar direction. concerned only about the

november election. i urge my colleagues to vote no. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan reserves. the gentleman from texas, mr. brady, is recognized. mr. brady: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman may proceed. mr. brady: mr. speaker, enough really is enough. medicare pays their local doctors to treat our seniors has gone on for far too long. it's making it harder for seniors to see a doctor they know, and who know them. it's chasing local doctors out of medicare and out of private practice. and it's encouraging too much waste and too many unnecessary procedures within medicare. mr. chairman, the health subcommittee of ways and means, my top priority has been to find a permanent, reliable 21st century solution both political parties and physicians can embrace. h.r. 4015 repeals the current flawed formula for reimbursing our doctors and ends the yearly threat of massive cuts. working with america's

physicians, it establishes a more patient centered approach to provide stability to our doctors, rewards them for high quality care, begins to streamline the red tape our physicians face, and encourages better coordination and prevention. over time, it transitions to a model that rewards value over volume, using the real life approaches that doctors use not what washington wants. h.r. 4015 is a solid foundation on which to build a better medicare system and it has overwhelming support from physicians. this is a major step forward but we need to finish the job. we need to work together, republicans and democrats, house and senate, to figure out how to make this policy a reality in a way that doesn't increase the deficit. there may be disagreements over how to pay for this reform. that's understandable.