barton: i was going to yield to mr. pitts, but i see you standing there. i would yield 30 seconds to the the gentleman from oklahoma, mr. sullivan. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for 30 seconds. mr. sullivan: i would like to thank congressman barton for yielding me time. and higher premiums, higher taxes and cutting medicare is not health care reform. republicans care about health care, but we don't care for this bill. unfortunately, the white house and congressional democrats are still insisting on their massive, 2,700-page bill that includes higher premiums, $500 billion in higher taxes and $500 billion in cuts to senior medicare. my son who is here this week, tommy sullivan, can consider that that's not reform. the bill will cause millions of -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. waxman: madam speaker, i'm pleased to yield at this time, one minute to the the gentlewoman from colorado, ms. did he get and -- degette. the speaker pro tempor

barton: i was going to yield to mr. pitts, but i see you standing there. i would yield 30 seconds to the the gentleman from oklahoma, mr. sullivan. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for 30 seconds. mr. sullivan: i would like to thank congressman barton for yielding me time. and higher premiums, higher taxes and cutting medicare is not health care reform. republicans care about health care, but we don't care for this bill. unfortunately, the white house and congressional democrats are still insisting on their massive, 2,700-page bill that includes higher premiums, $500 billion in higher taxes and $500 billion in cuts to senior medicare. my son who is here this week, tommy sullivan, can consider that that's not reform. the bill will cause millions of -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. waxman: madam speaker, i'm pleased to yield at this time, one minute to the the gentlewoman from colorado, ms. did he get and -- degette. the speaker pro tempor

i now yield to the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. pitts to further discuss this motion to recommit. mr. pitts: thank you, mr. speakerism rise in support of the motion before us. over and over again, polls have shown the public does not support federal funding of abortions. unfortunately, the senate rejected the will of the people and passed a bill that has become known as the most massively pro-abortion piece of legislation to come before congress since roe v. wade. despite the political runaround we've been given this last week, the facts remain before us today, the senate bill, departs from long standing current policy and achieves the exact opposite effect of current law. and an executive order promised by the president will not change these facts. an executive order does not trump a statute and the courts will undoubtedly look to the legislative text to interpret the law. moreover the promised order fails to correct the egregious pro-life concerns contained in this bill. it will simply reiterate the meaningless accounting scheme cooked

mr. pitts: thank you, mr. speaker. we have all heard about the cornhusker kickback and louisiana purchase, but there are other special deals in the senate health care bill that are on the verge of becoming law. in connecticut there's $100 million for university hospital and sertfide to senator dodd. $500 million in medicaid to bailout the health care program in massachusetts. the small state of vermont gets $600 million for their medicaid program. this bill will subsidize new jersey pharmaceutical companies. will give $5 bill to union health care plans in massachusetts in michigan. it will slash medicare advantage programs for every state except florida. or exempt blue cross blue shield of michigan and nebraska from the new annual fee on health insurers. this bill will provide higher medicare payments in north dakota. and exempt hospitals in hawaii from cuts. all of these will become law the moment house arrogantly deems this bill passed to the president. is it any wonder the american people don't like this bill being

mr. pittsour guests in the gallery to please join us in the pledge. 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 requests for one-minute speeches. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania rise? mr. pitts: to address the house for one minute. revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. pitts: madam speaker, today the liberal editors of the "washington post" state in their lead editorial that the current trajectory of entitlement spending will bankrupt the country. on the facing page, conservative commentator george will calls america's entitlement programs a ponzi scheme, and quote, a teetering tower of unkeepable promises, end quote. indeed, this is the true crisis in american health care. we have already made over $100 trillion in entitlement promises we can't keep. but what congres

mr. pitts: mr. speaker, today we will hear again from the president about health care reform. however moving forward on another version of these massive health care bills is not progress. raising hundreds of millions of dollars in new taxes is not progress. culting half a trillion dollars from medicare is not progress. putting the government in charge of health care in this country is not progress. we all know how flawed the senate health care bill is. how it's full of backroom deals like the coshhusker -- cornhusker kickback. some people say the american people will appreciate the bill after it becomes law. let's not pretend the american people just don't know enough about the bill to make an informed decision. they are informed and they reject it. let's scrap this massive bill and start over just like the american people would like us to. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from california rise? >> to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. ms. sanchez: thank you, mr. speaker. today i

mr. pitts: madam speaker, we have talked a lot about how this bill is distracting us from the issue that the american people want us to focus on, and that is jobs. but this bill isn't just merely a distraction. it will have a profoundly negative impact on the job market. you cannot raise taxes by hundreds of billions of dollars on individuals and businesses and expect that it has no impact on employers and employees. raising taxes per employee by $2,000 would not encourage businesses to hire more workers. and workers receiving health care subsidies would see their new federal entitlement evaporate when their wages increase by too much. under this bill, more pay could mean less health care effectively trapping workers in lower-wage jobs. not only would this bill disturge job growth, it would discourage wage growth also. the bottom line is, this bill will destroy jobs at a time when we can least afford it. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the

mr. cantor: madam speaker, i take that to mean the stupak-pitts language will not be in the reconciliation package. i yield. mr. hoyer: as i said we don't believe any change in that language because the gentleman is well aware reconciliation needs to deal with budgetary impact. we don't believe that that can be dealt with in reconciliation. mr. cantor: i thank the gentleman. i would say to the gentleman that there was, and i'm sure he has seen a letter that has been signed by 41 senate republicans in which they indicated they would oppose any effort to waive the so-called byrd rule during the senate's consideration of the reconciliation bill which means to me, madam speaker, it is far from certain that the senate will actually pass the bill when the house sends it to the senate. and in fact call that to the gentleman's attention that we stand ready to continue to work in another direction, but it seems to me very much in doubt. mr. hoyer: will my friend yield? mr. cantor: i yield. mr. hoyer: i'm glad you brought it up because you brought it up in juxtaposition of the issue of the stupak am

mr. cantor: madam speaker, i take that to mean the stupak-pitts language will not be in the reconciliation package. i yield. mr. hoyer: as i said we don't believe any change in that language because the gentleman is well aware reconciliation needs to deal with budgetary impact. we don't believe that that can be dealt with in reconciliation. mr. cantor: i thank the gentleman. i would say to the gentleman that there was, and i'm sure he has seen a letter that has been signed by 41 senate republicans in which they indicated they would oppose any effort to waive the so-called byrd rule during the senate's consideration of the reconciliation bill which means to me, madam speaker, it is far from certain that the senate will actually pass the bill when the house sends it to the senate. and in fact call that to the gentleman's attention that we stand ready to continue to work in another direction, but it seems to me very much in doubt. mr. hoyer: will my friend yield? mr. cantor: i yield. mr. hoyer: i'm glad you brought it up because you brought it up in juxtaposition of the issue of the stupak am

mr. cantor: madam speaker, i take that to mean the stupak-pitts language will not be in the reconciliation package. i yield. mr. hoyer: as i said we don't believe any change in that language because the gentleman is well aware reconciliation needs to deal with budgetary impact. we don't believe that that can be dealt with in reconciliation. mr. cantor: i thank the gentleman. i would say to the gentleman that there was, and i'm sure he has seen a letter that has been signed by 41 senate republicans in which they indicated they would oppose any effort to waive the so-called byrd rule during the senate's consideration of the reconciliation bill which means to me, madam speaker, it is far from certain that the senate will actually pass the bill when the house sends it to the senate. and in fact call that to the gentleman's attention that we stand ready to continue to work in another direction, but it seems to me very much in doubt. mr. hoyer: will my friend yield? mr. cantor: i yield. mr. hoyer: i'm glad you brought it up because you brought it up in juxtaposition of the issue of the stupak am