mr. barton: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. barton: mr. speaker, i rise in support of h.r. 631, which congratulates continental airlines on its 75th anniversary. i want to commend congressman green for introducing the resolution. proud to be a republican supportor -- supporter of that. as one of three texas based airlines, continental in houston, texas, southwest in dallas, texas, and american airlines in fort worth texas, we are proud of the airline industry and our state. we are very proud continental is celebrating its 75th anniversary. it is the embodiment of the american dream. as congressman green pointed out it was established back in 1934 in west texas in el paso. over the last 75 years it has evolved into one of the largest commercial airlines in the world. serves 260 destinations with more than 2,700 flights on five continents. it's been named the best airline in north ame

mr. barton? mr. barton eight. mr. hall? mr. hall, eight. mr. upton? mr. upton, eight. mr. stern? mr. stern, aye. mr. deal? mr. deal aye. mr. whitfield? mr. whitfield aye. mr. ship cuss? mr. shattuck. mr. status aye. mr. blunt? mr. blunt, aye. mr. boyer? mr. boyer, aye. mr. rod dan know vich? mr. rad done know vich, aye. mr. pitts? mr. pitts, eye. ms. bono max? ms. bono max aye a. mr. walden? >> aye. >> mr. walden, aye. mr. terry? mr. rogers? >> aye. >> mr. rogers, aye. mrs. my rick? mrs. my rick aye. mr. sullivan? mr. sullivan aye. mr. murphy of pennsylvania? aye. mr. murphy, aye. mr. burgess? aye. mr. burgess aye. ms. blackburn? mrs. blackburn aye. mr. beginningry aye. mr. scully? >> aye. >> mr. scully, aye. mr. voucher? mr. voucher rotes no. mr. goran? [ inaudible ] mr. goran, aye? mr. marquee? >> no. >> mr. marquee, no. mr. matheson? >> aye. >> mr. matheson, aye. mr. rush? >> no. >> mr. rush votes no. mr. ross? >> no. >> mr. ross votes no. >> all members responded to the call of the roll? any

mr. barton. >> mr. chairman, i want to yield to mr. stupak. >> thank you, mr. barton for yielding. as this start off i was disappointed the author of the amendment said some how we use this as a place in a spill. for 17 years even before the author ever came to congress i worked on these amendments. i never used it as a place in a spill. we've always based our legislation when i have worked with both sides on principles and bar ethics and morals may be. so it isn't a poison pill. secondly, early on this year in january, 180 members, democrats and republicans wrote to the speaker, to the head of the appropriations, wrote to the rules committee and said we've always had laureate to protect our interests, our beliefs. please let us have our work right terse on the amendments, excuse me the appropriations bills. we heard nothing and commerce state appropriation we lost the writer. financial service appropriation we lost the writer. yesterday or earlier this week the senate actually took out the hyde amendment of federal employees health benefit package where it has always been. so we'd

mr. barton. >> mr.hairman, i'm -- i am not a speed-reader but i can read and i have tried to -- to scan every page of this -- this 70-some odd page amendment. 75 page. this are good things in here. there are also things that in of themselves, would be, entire bills. the very first within, the section 3201, the community living. that appears to be a brand new long-term health care program. it is in the paid for. f one of the one of the provisions on food labels in restaurants, appears to be a preem shun of a state labels laws for restaurants. it appears, i have to say. i'm in the saying it is. and given the fact that the majority had all year to -- to put their bill together, and right out of the box their first amendment is a 75-page omnibus, i'm going to oppose it, reserving the right later in the mark up if we defeat this to come back and some things put back in on a case by case basis. but the gentleman yield? >> sure. >> i would point out with regard to the chas act, because you mentioned about the

mr. barton: their comment should be show us the bill. mr. burgess: let me reclaim the time. i thank the ranking member for taking time out of his evening and spending time with us. there are a number of websites where people can go and sign online petitions. american solutions.com has a petition. galen.org has a petition. another group called letfreedomring has a downloadable responsible health care pledge where you can your member of congress or senator to pledge to have at least read the bill in its entirety and have the bill available for 72 hours on a website so the public can view this bill prior, prior to a vote taken in the house of representatives. he's been very patient. he's a new member and he's probably more patient than i deserve him to be, but dr. fleming from my neighboring state of louisiana, one of two new louisiana doctors who have joined the republican caucus. i want to thank him for his time tonight. he has a very interesting proposition that he wanted to share with us. i yield whatever time he may consume bearing in mind we have 15 minutes left of the ho

mr. barton. >> i have unanimous consent request. e have a new member on the republican side that's joined us, mr. boehner. i asked that he be added on the minority side. for the remainder of the markup with full voting privileges. is there an objection to that? >> i have heard one. from mr. boehner. >> we're glad to have our leader here. >> we welcome the republican leader to our committee. >> the vote now comes on the engel/capps amendment. the ayes have it and the amendment is greed to. . >> mr. chairman, two amendments i'll offer in block. to the relief of the committee, they have nothing to do with biomaz. >> let's not move on. two amendments. >> walden 3 and walden 2. will offer them in block. >> mr. chairman, we don't have walden 3. i mean -- >> we have walden 3. they're looking for walden 3. >> one is division "b." and one is to division "a." >> we're going to consider the amendment as read. we're going to accept it with some caveats. but with some statements. if you want to brief on your comment and i'll be very brief, mr. ch

mr. barton informs me he would like a roll call vote. the clerk will call the roll. >> mr.an. >> no. >> mr. waxman votes know. no. mr. dingal. mr. did i ngal votes no. mr. markey. no. mr. boucher. mr. balone. though. mr. gordon. mr. brush. miss essue. votes no. mrs. supak. mr. stupak, no. mr. angle. mr. angle, no. mr. green. mr. green no. ms. degett. mrs. cap. mrs. cap, no. mr. doyle. mr. doyle no. ms. shakowski, no. mr. gonzales. mr. ensley. no. ms. baldwin. ms. baldwin, no. mr. ross. mr. ross no. bl weaner? mr. weaner, no. mr. mathison. mr. butterfield. mr. butterfield no. mr. malazon, aye. mr. barrow, mr. barrow aye. mr. hill. mr. hill no. ms. matsui. ms. matsui, no. mrs. christianson. mrs. christianson no. ms. caster. ms. caster, no. mr. sarbain. mr. sarbain no. mr. murphy of connecticut. mr. murphy no. mr. space. mr. space no. mr. mcnurney. mr. mcnurney no. ms. sutton. ms. sutton, no. mr. braillely. mr. braillely no. mr. welsh, mr. welsh no. mr. barton. mr. barton votes aye. mr. hall. mr. hall aye. mr. upton. mr. upton aye. mr. sterns. mr. sterns votes aye. mr. deal. m

mr. barton for closing on your eminence. >> briefly mr. chairman, the contrary to my friend from new jersey says i'm an optimist, but i look as the cbo scoring on a public auction and the current bill and i see when trillion, that's not all because of a public plan been a big chunk of it is indelicate this alternative and i see approximately 2 billion a year. if we get the same band for the bought except own spin to don't -- $2 billion a year instead of a hundred billion a. seems to me we would want to go with a less expensive alternative. but i'm very optimistic. i think the market transparency, people for the sake and infrastructure, it saves a lot of money in the overhead. with all respect i think that as much preferable to something the public opinion polls less than half the country says they want. that i yield back. >> the vote now comes on the barton amendment and i believe we will go to a roll-call vote so the clerk will call the roll. >> [roll call] >> [roll call] >> [roll call] >> [roll call] >> [roll call] >> [roll call] >> [rol

mr. barton, mr. this provision is modelled on one that is already in current law for the cobra continuation for health insurance that requires employee lawy employee employers to provide coverage for 18 months after severance, also subjecting all public health grants to jeopardy if the state were not to comply. there has been no noncompliance and no state has lost eligibility from provision. >> it's a huge -- >> we're telling employers that we want them if they're going to provide health insurance to their employ yee employees to m minimum standard. why not tell the state employees to require minimum standards xs we can't tell the states directly what to do. we have to use whatever leverage we have over them. the constitution says you can't tell states what to do, but we can put a condition on it. if states want public health money from the federal government, one of the conditions would be that they are going to treat their employees as fairly as any other -- the other point i wanted to make is your

mr. barton. point of order. >> i want to oppose mr. pallone's interpretation on the point of order, and you can correct me, mr. chairman, if i'm wrong but i believe this committee and past congresses has passed liability reform measures at the full committee level, that included certainly the subject issues. and doctor burgesses amendment, and in some cases some of the specifics. so i don't know why it was an order in past congresses it wouldn't be in order in this congress. there are certainly things in the bill within the jurisdiction of the committee, and there are things in the managers substitute that are poorly in the jurisdiction of the ways and means committee and they are in the mm and the nature of the substitute that we are considering. so i would respectfully urge you to rule against the point of order, and you may vote against his amendment but at least allow it to be voted on. >> further discussion of the point of order. >> i will yield. if i have time. >> if i could, just bring up under rule 10. this committee has jurisd

mr. barton. point of order. >> i want to oppose mr.lone's interpretation on the point of order, and you can correct me, mr. chairman, if i'm wrong but i believe this committee and past congresses has passed liability reform measures at the full committee level, that included certainly the subject issues. and doctor burgesses amendment, and in some cases some of the specifics. so i don't know why it was an order in past congresses it wouldn't be in order in this congress. there are certainly things in the bill whin the jurisdiction of the committee, and there are things in the managers substitute that are poorly in the jurisdiction of the ways and means committee and they are in the mm and the nature of the substitute that we are considering. so i would respectfully urge you to rule against the point of order, and you may vote against his amendment but at least allow it to be voted on. >> further discussion of the point of order. >> i will yield. if i have time. >> if i could, just bring up under rule 10. this committee has jurisdiction

mr. barton. >> mr. chairman, i rise in support of the soul of an amendment. we thought this was the single most innocuous good government amendment that we could offer in good faith to show we were going to try to work to improve the bill without destroying any of the underlying principles that the majority is embedded in a. this amendment is fairly simple. it says that the secretary of health and human services who by the way is appointed by president obama within a year has to look at all the new programs coming in this division day of the bill, so we are trying to stay within the scope of the procedure of the chairman has organized. and send a report to the congress and then if in that study the secretary determines some of the programs are duplicative and we even change to this zero bits, we said to the maximum extent a proper determination of the federal programs within this division so we even give all little leeway there. if you look good your underlying bell and you create a brand new commissioner, who can terminate people's individual health insuranc

mr. barton. >> thank you, congressman shadegg. one of the first tenets of medicine, the practice of medicine is to do no harm. i think our friends on the democratic side would be well to consider that as they unveil their latest version of their healthcare proposal later this afternoon. the proposal, as we expect it to be and as it was last week would destroy the private insurance healthcare market in america within 5 to 10 years because of the mandates and the taxes and the penalties. this bill that is being unveiled today takes a different approach. it tries to use the power of the marketplace and the power of the individual making free choices to provide access to more americans through the pooling arrangement that congressman shadegg has alluded to, which i think is very, very important. and also by providing a tax credit for those individuals who don't work or they can get insurance. they can get a tax credit or they can join one of these pools. there are two big problems in the healthcare industry or healthcare market today.

mr. barton votes no. mr. hall? mr. upton? mr. upton, no. mr. stearns? mr. stearns no. mr. deal? mr. deal no. mr. whitfield? mr. whitfield no. mr. shimkus? mr. shimkus no. mr. shaddock? mr. shaddock no. mr. blunt? mr. blunt no. mr. williams no. mr. radanovich no. mr. pitts no. miss bono mack no. mr. walden? mr. walden no. mr. terry? mr. terry no. mr. rogers? mr. rogers no. ms. myrick? [ applause ] myrick no. mr. sullivan? mr. sullivan? mr. sullivan no. mr. murphy of pennsylvania? mr. murphy no. mr. burgess? mr. burgess no. mrs. blackburn? mrs. blackburn no? mr. gainbridge no. mr. doany? mr. doany no. mr. boucher? mr. boucher no. mr. murphy? mr. murphy no. mr. rush? mr. rush no. mr. hill? mr. hill no. mr. matheson? mr. matheson no. mr. green? mr. green no. mr. gordon? mr. gordon votes no. >> have all the members responded to the vote? >> is that everybody? >> any member wish to change? his or her vote? all right. when the clerk's ready, we'll get a report of the vote. >> mr. chairman, on that amendment, there were zero ayes and 57 nos. >> zero ayes, 57ñññññw in section-- >> without ob

mr. barton. >> mr. chairman, i rise in support of the soul of an amendment.we thought this was the single most innocuous good government amendment that we could offer in good faith to show we were going to try to work to improve the bill without destroying any of the underlying principles that the majority is embedded in a. this amendment is fairly simple. it says that the secretary of health and human services who by the way is appointed by president obama within a year has to look at all the new programs coming in this division day of the bill, so we are trying to stay within the scope of the procedure of the chairman has organized. and send a report to the congress and then if in that study the secretary determines some of the programs are duplicative and we even change to this zero bits, we said to the maximum extent a proper determination of the federal programs within this division so we even give all little leeway there. if you look good your underlying bell and you create a brand new commissioner, who can terminate people's individual health insurance

mr. barton, mr. deal, and mr. shimkus on the minority side have worked very well and carefully, thoughtfully with us. and i owe them a debt of thanks and gratitude. staff members like rachel and eric have worked long on this as well as my friend, virgil miller. the agriculture committee has been wise advisors and helpers in coming to the bill that can be agreed on by the two committees. representative levin, chair of the subcommittee of -- on trade of ways and means committee has been extremely important. as has representative delauro -- chair of the appropriations subcommittee. and jenny ireland, former staff member of this committee, has been of enormous help in the drafting of this legislation. we have a long list of supporters. the obama administration, grocery manufacturers association, the people who sell are going to understand that they're being charged a participation fee. the wine institutes. the wine america. disstilled spirits council of the united states. center for science and the public interest. co

mr. barton, you are such a pessimist. you have a notion that we have out there is doomed to failure.bill is the most optimistic. >> i am optimistic. but i look at the cbo score and the public auction, and i see a trillion. that is not all because of the public plan, but a big chunk is. looking at the alternative, i see 2 billion a year. >> the armchair freudian on the house energy and commerce committee -- this has been extraordinary. lawmakers have opportunity to push a variety of initiatives. from the republican side, it was about limiting funds for abortion and health care legislation. that failed. jane: it sounds like they will not get anything before going away for august. >> that is right, and it was explicitly confirmed last night for the first time by the leader of the so-called gang of six, who have been trying to negotiate a compromise on the senate side for reform. three democrats and three republicans, led by the senator from montana who last night in the evening acknowledged explicitly that it would not finalize a deal before the senate recess on august 7, but he said th

mr. barton from texas. >> thank you. before i give my opening statement, let me amplify what you said about our chairman emeritus, mr. dingell because some people get one year of experience and that is it, but in his case you could say that would be one year 83 times. and mr. dingell's case each year he adds to the base where he compounds and amplifies by orders of magnitude. i think you can honestly say that our friend and chairman emeritus is the most influential member of congress in our lifetime and it is such a privilege to have him on our committee. it is really fun when he is on my side. is not so much fun when he is not on my side, but even then i learned from him so hearty congratulations from the minority side to a true gentleman of the house, the conveyor and the protector of institutional viability for this body. we wish you many, many more. with regards to this hearing mr. chairman, i would bring the members' attention to today's wall street editorials op-eds piece about a particular agency. distant title let

mr. barton from texas. >> thank you. before i give my opening statement, let me amplify what you said about our chairman emeritus, mr. dingell because some people get one year of experience and that is it, but in his case you could say that would be one year 83 times. and mr. dingell's case each year he adds to the base where he compounds and amplifies by orders of magnitude. i think you can honestly say that our friend and chairman emeritus is the most influential member of congress in our lifetime and it is such a privilege to have him on our committee. it is really fun when he is on my side. is not so much fun when he is not on my side, but even then i learned from him so hearty congratulations from the minority side to a true gentleman of the house, the conveyor and the protector of institutional viability for this body. we wish you many, many more. with regards to this hearing mr. chairman, i would bring the members' attention to today's wall street editorials op-eds piece about a particular agency. distant title let

mr. barton referred to earlier. let me mention the area of illegal immigrants being a part of a publicly-financed health system. we have been through this debate before. we have a number of amendments that would assure the taxpayers of this country that they are not going to be using their hard-earned tax dollars to pay for people illegally in this country. those things resonate with my constituents and certainly with most people across this country. i'm afraid we won't have the opportunity to offer those kinds of, i think, progressive reforms not only to the current system but also to the proposal that the democrats have on the table. let me echo what mr. blunt and mr. deal have indicated. the president has obviously not read the bill himself. nothing in this shall limit individuals from keeping their current hell benefit plan. that sounds simple, doesn't? it? the president has said "if you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor. if you like your healthcare plan, you will be able to keep that healt

mr. barton. >> the minority appeals the minute and yield back the bounds of its time. >> the chair wishesto recognize for additional comments, other members but we hope they will not be as lengthy as comments i mr. weiner. i am going to yield five minutes to mr. in, but i hope he would take just a short part of it and then yield to others who wish to speak on the subject. >> thank you very much, thank you. i will take less time and yield to others. first of all, i am in strong support of this amendment. i want to commend mr. whitaker i think single-payer makes the most sense for this country at a time when we're looking to change health care, at a time we know that 47 million americans are uninsured, at a time when we know the health care system is broken getting more and more expensive. the insurance companies are cherry picking. people can't get insurance. people like medicare, let's expand medicare. to me, it's simple. i talked to senior citizens and they like medicare. they are afraid medicare will be cut but they like it as it is now. we know that this plan, talking about saving mone

mr. barton, as a fellow texan, would you agree we have no health care, but instead disease and injury management system? guest: if the doctor is talking about the status quo of the current system -- i am not sure exactly how to answer this question. i would say any american, or any person in the united states -- does not have to be american citizens -- if they need health care, they will get it in some way. it might not be the perfect delivery system where you go to your primary care doctor and then referred to a specialist or go to a hospital if it is a serious situation. but you will be cared for in an emergency room or clinic or in the normal private health care delivery system today. there are people who say what we have is a sick care system as opposed to a health care system, in a sense of the way the insurance policy practices are set up. we don't do the full range of preventive wellness programs because traditional is -- traditionally some are considered discretionary and you have to be really sick or in bad shape before the insurance system kicks in. host: let us go to the phones. calif

mr. barton. i am is sincere when i say i want to work with you. >> thank you very much. >> i want to recognize the chairman emeritus of the committee, the champion of health care reform, the man who will be the first name on the legislation that will produce a health care reform. >> mr. chairman, thank you for holding this important hearing. thank you for your remarkable leadership while moving forward to a resolution of the health care problems we have in this country. i want you to know i am grateful and proud. i am particularly appreciative of the kind words to set about my dad. on behalf of my dad, and to thank you for your kind words in french. i also want to do something of a personal character here, and that is to welcome the secretary sebelius to the committee. your father sat in this committee for a number of years. your father in law was in the house, as you will recall. he was a man who was much respected. you're coming is like coming home. we hope you feel that way, madam secretary. t

mr. barton here who will speak. we also have marcia blackburn, phil from georgia, and i believe we will be joined by robb bishop of utah. we are announcing the introduction of the improving health care for all americans act. the improving health care for all americans act takes a radically different approach than the bill that you have heard about and is seen in discussion drafts of from the majority party. this bill reforms health care from the bottom up. it reforms health care by empower individuals and putting them under control of their own health care. there is some key legislation i will highlight very quickly. i will then be happy to take any questions. the bottom line is, this reformer's health care from the bottom up, it does so by empower individuals and puts the patients first. this legislation is patient focused. i would begin asking you, when was the last time that when putting the government in control of something resulted in net costing less? the think the answer is, when you put the government in co

mr. barton supports the bill. >> i support in its current form as long as we don't talk to that. >> are we ready for the vote? >> all those in favor and fox8 high, a post say now, the ayes have it in the man as are agreed to appear in mr. matheson, do you have an amendment, that would give you two minutes. >> mr. chairman, i will offer to put my fulsome in the record if i can. i just want to call up my amendment the bipartisan amendment mr. rogers from michigan with and my colleague from ohio. >> without objection to the amendment will be considered as read and without objection the gentleman's full segment will be in the record demand very briefly i want to say while they're in a geographic shortages across the country general pediatrics also shows there pronounced shortages across the country in some pediatrics with surgical specialty is. i know that on mr. talking about specialties as of special days this could open up a number of different challenges. i would just point out in terms of pediatrics and this is an issue where there are some specific problems around the country. i know tha

mr. barton to use the term democrat majority? he has sent this along with mrs. pelosi's statement back, and is awaiting a response from the franking commission. now what's wrong with that? well, what's wrong with that if you wait for a response, then you lose your time to communicate. you try to communicate on issues as they come up. this has to do with cap and trade before it passed the house and he's not allowed to use it. another colleague submitted a review for the week of july 13 and said, this bill imposes a new payroll tax on employers who do not provide their employees with insurance. the democrats demanded it be changed to read, this bill imposes a new payroll tax on employers who do not provide employees with insurance. the problem is, it's not an opinion, but a fact. it was pointed out to them on page 150 of their own bill that says specifically the language that was quoted by our colleague from florida. mr. ken calvert from california pointed out that he quoted veer bait imfrom president obama in a speech that he made at a recent town hall that he ma

mr. barton, from texas, for their excellent collaboration had -- in bringing this important piece of legislation expeditiously to the house floor. mr. speaker, the underlying legislation which we are re-authorizing today, the torture victims relief act of 1998, is the practical expression of our deeply held values. americans abhor and condemn the use of torture wherever it may occur. including at the hands of our own citizens. this bill demonstrates the commitment of the united states to stand squarely with the victims of this barbaric and illegal practice not only fighting against the use of torture but also providing hope and relief to those who survive it wherever and whoever they may be. mr. speaker, according to amnesty international over 117 countries around the world still engage in torture. amidst allegations of our own government's possible involvement in torture, president obama and the american people have reaffirmed our policy that the united states will not torture. an estimated 500,000 foreign torture survivors reside in the united states and over 100 million may exist worldwide. t

mr. barton, as a fellow texan, would you agree we have no health care, but instead disease and injury managementsystem? guest: if the doctor is talking about the status quo of the current system -- i am not sure exactly how to answer this question. i would say any american, or any person in the united states -- does not have to be american citizens -- if they need health care, they will get it in some way. it might not be the perfect delivery system where you go to your primary care doctor and then referred to a specialist or go to a hospital if it is a serious situation. but you will be cared for in an emergency room or clinic or in the normal private health care delivery system today. there are people who say what we have is a sick care system as opposed to a health care system, in a sense of the way the insurance policy practices are set up. we don't do the full range of preventive wellness programs because traditional is -- traditionally some are considered discretionary and you have to be really sick or in bad shape before the insurance system kicks in. host: let us go to the phones. califo

mr. with field kanaka want to thank the gentle lady from california and from texas for their average on this amendment and i want to thank and the ranking member bartonfor accepting and simply remove the inequity in the reimbursement positions for the medicines they use in treating cancer patients. it is a serious problem and i am delighted that the members will accept this amendment. >> with that mr. chairman i believe i will yield back the balance of my time care of him and the gentle lady yelled back, are we ready for the question fykes all those in favor of the matsui amendment say i. oppose nos. the amendment is agreed to. mr. bergman. >> allies to engage in a colloquy with it chairman kim mack it is my understanding that we are prepared to reassess subject to the call of the chair and that juror inclination to reconvene the committee and 10:00 a.m. tomorrow morning, is that correct? confess correct to my gloomy due reconvene at 10:00 a.m. while the bill be open to amendment and ending points including a, b and c.? >> we will say with a and b and then after that we will open it up. >> and how long do you intend to continue the markup. it my unde

mr. barton have been enormously invaluable in the work we have done. i commend him and i thank him. he speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan. mr. dingell: mr. speaker, at this time i yield to the distinguished chairwoman of the appropriations subcommittee of jurisdiction on this matter, two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. delauro: mr. speaker, what is this bill about? what is it about? food borne illness in the united states of america kills 5,000 people every single year. we went to war in iraq and afghanistan when 3,000 people unbenongse that they went to -- unbenonks that they went to work that day and weren't coming home and we went to war in afghanistan as a result. we know that 5,000 people every year die of a food borne illness, and an illness, my friends, that can be preventive. stand with the mother and the father of a 2-year-old child. the parts who went to the grocery store and brought home spinach or sprouts or lettuce and their child died because of e. coli. stand with the son and daughter of an elderly person in a nursing