mr. waxman: mr.peaker, 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 incentivi

mr. waxman: mr. chairman, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. chairman, kofi annan, the former secretary general of the united nations, wrote in the "washington post" earlier this year, quote, climate change is the biggest challenge of our time. it threatens the well-being of hundreds of millions of people today and many billions more in time, end quote. robert ruben, the former treasury secretary said recently, quote, there are a lot of really significant monumental issues facing the global economy, but this supersedes them all, end quote. the energy and commerce committee's the committee in the house that has the power to tackle this monumental issue. the biggest challenge of our time. but we are missing in action. instead of listening to the scientists and working on a bipartisan basis to protect the planet for our children and future generations, we're considering today a science-denial bill that would strip the a.p.a. -- e.p.a. of authority to s

mr. waxman. >> mr. chief justice and may it please the court. in atkins versus virginia this court held that the constitution bars executing persons with mental retardation. that is persons with significantly sub average intellectual function concurrent with deficits in adaptive behavior with an onset before the age of 18. because of the standard error of measurement that is inherent in the iq test it is universally accepted that worsens with obtained scores of 71 to 75 can and often do have mental retardation when those three prongs are met. the statistical error of measurement or saddam is --. >> a line has to be drawn somewhere. and we did say in atkins that we would leave it up to the states to determine the standards for this issue. so what is the rule being announced today? are we saying that 70 is not okay and that 75 wood the? how would you announce the rule? >> well let me first take some issue with all due respect with your characterization of atkins. what this court said in atkins is not that we leave it to the states to establish the

mr. waxman. >> mr. chief justice and may it please the court. in atkins versus virginia this court held that the constitution bars executing persons with mental retardation. that is persons with significantly sub average intellectual function concurrent with deficits in adaptive behavior with an onset before the age of 18. because of the standard error of measurement that is inherent in the iq test it is universally accepted that worsens with obtained scores of 71 to 75 can and often do have mental retardation when those three prongs are met. the statistical error of measurement or saddam is --. >> a line has to be drawn somewhere. and we did say in atkins that we would leave it up to the states to determine the standards for this issue. so what is the rule being announced today? are we saying that 70 is not okay and that 75 wood the? how would you announce the rule? >> well let me first take some issue with all due respect with your characterization of atkins. what this court said in atkins is not that we leave it to the states to establish the

mr. waxman. they have been two champions on the subject of health care in america and doing so in a fiscally sound way. and while i appreciate the concerns that they expressed here, and i share them, and i will speak to that, i do think that we have to think carefully about the decision that we make. i know that they have. this is an example -- the leadership bringing this bill to the floor on the short fuse that the expiration date is march 31 without most people in this room without ever having on what is in the bill what is a missed opportunity. we should be considering right now a bill that would permanently, permanently speak to the s.g.r. for those in the public, i know it's inside baseball talk, s.g.r. that is the rate that docs are compensated for treating medicare patients. so don't think of s.g.r. think of the patients. and that's what we're doing here. think of the certainty that they need in terms of their health care, and that is our seniors. think of the certainty that a permanent f

mr. waxman, and others and we passed our bill out of committee last summer, 51-0. speaker boehner said he didn't think we could honor mother teresa for sainthood with a vote like that. i commend my good friend, mr. camp from michigan, and sandy levin, the gentleman from michigan, on the floor now, as we work together and work with the senate as well to actually lock in place a bill on literally the last day that chairman baucus was in the united states senate to resolve thflt and we knew all along we were going to have to have a pay for. and here in the house a couple weeks ago we passed a bill. some on partisan lines, not 100% on either side, but we passed a 10-year fix with a pay for. great ninth grade civics teacher, no longer with us, he's with the lord. but i tell you as i sit down with my students as i did this week, a lot of them are here in town, and speak to my high schools and colleges, they know there's never such a thing maybe as a perfect bill. one of the first lessons in civics is that you pass a bill in the house, you pass a bill in the senate. they

mr. waxman of california announced he is retiring and mr. dingle as well. so you have three people active in telco policy and they will not be on the committee. you have a whole, i will not say new generation, but frank from new jersey and the california and pennsylvania and colorado members are very seasoned who are not junior by any means, but haven't served and been in the positions as the guys i mentioned that are retiring. it is time to look at the telco act. in '96, republicans had taken the majority for the first time in 40 years and they had a new chairman and subcommittee chairm chairman. we were trying to be leading edge at at time. if you go back to 1996, there wasn't an internet really. cell phones were these bag phones that were very expensive and very few people had. it was in a totally different environment. and now, i have a congressional black berry and a campaign i-phone plus a wireless beeper. i have high definition television sets. you name it. my 8-year-old son has a laptop computer and a tablet. whole different ball game. the way we us

mr. waxman. >> two weeks ago when we held a hearing on the legislation, the subcommittee is going to consider tomorrow, i said i was not prepared to support the bill as drafted but that i wanted to work with chairman walden to put together a bill we could all support. i'm glad to report we are making progress. we still have some issues to work through. but thanks to the leadership of chairman walden we are making progress. one area where progress is clera me is on the issue of set top boxes. i expect tomorrow representative proposalll introduce a as an amendment that will get bipartisan support. there are outstanding issues we still need to address, namely the concerns of section iv of the discussion draft. i share my republican colleagues desire to see the fcc complete a long-overdue quadrennial review of the media ownership rules, but this provision would go the fcc by restricting me from addressing coordination between broadcasters that is undermining local news and diversity of viewpoints from different broadcast outlets that are constituents need. i cannot support the provision as drafte

mr. waxman, for five minutes. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. we are here today to discuss draft satellite television legislation released by chairman walden last week. i'm not preparedle to support the bill in its current version, but i'm prepared to work with chairman walden and chairman upton, ranking member eshoo to get a bill we can all stand behind. last night the house unanimously passed the s.e.c. process reform act. it took work to get that bill into shape that every member of the house could support. but if we are able to bridge differences in the s.e.c. process bill, that were much bigger than we face today, i'm hopeful that with good will on both sides we can reach the same result on this issue. my initial preference was for a clean re-authorization of the expiring provisions of the satellite television extension and localism act, or stella. previous authorizations may not have been clean, but the new provision that is had been added were part and parcel of the purpose of the law giving satellite subscribers access to local and netwo

mr. waxman of california announced he is retiring. you have three members who have been very active in telco policy for at least 40 years and they won't be on the committee. you have a new generation. these are all very seasoned members who are not junior by any means but they have not served in the positions as the guys that i just mentioned are retiring. it is time to look at the telco act. in 1996, the republicans had taken the majority for the first time in 40 years. jack fields of texas was the new subcommittee chairman. mr. markey was ranking member of the subcommittee. we were trying to be leading-edge at that time but if you go back to 1996, there was really not an internet. cell phones were bag phones. very few people had it. it was in a different environment. now i have a congressional blackberry and a campaign iphone plus a wireless beeper that i use. i have high definition television sets. you name it. my eight-year-old son has a laptop computer and a tablet. a whole different ballgame. the way we use what we now call the

mr. waxman of california's announced he's retiring, mr. dingell of michigan has announced he's retiring, so you've got three members who have been very active in telco policy, each of them for at least 40 years, and in dingell's case 60 years, and they won't be on committee. so you've got a whole -- i won't say a new generation, but frank pallone of new jersey and and anna eshoo of california, green of texas, these are all very seasoned members who have -- they're not junior by any means, but they haven't served and been in the positions as the guys that i just mentioned who are retiring. so, you know, it is time to look at the telco act. in '96 republicans had taken the majority for the first time in 40 years. tom bliley was the new chairman, jack fields of texas was the new subcommittee chairman. i think mr. markey was ranking member on the subcommittee, many dingell was the ranking member on the full committee. and then, you know, we were trying to be leading edge at that time. but if you go back to 1996, there really wasn't an internet

mr. waxman of california. the chair will reduce to two minutes the minimum time for any electronic vote in this series. the unfinished business is the request for a recorded vote on amendment number 1 printed in house report 113-373 by the gentleman from texas, mr. smith, on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the yies prevailed by -- ayes prevailed by a voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 1 printed in house report 113-373 offered by mr. smith of texas. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested. those in support of the request for a recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purpos

mr. waxman for five minutes for his opening statement. >> thank you mr. chairman. for more than four decades medicare has been a critical program for ensuring the health and also the financial well-being of seniors and people with disabilities. the program has evolved significantly over that time adding benefits, adding coverage options and becoming a major force in the u.s. health care market. as the program has grown and changed, so too has the oversight role of the centers for medicare and medicaid services or what we call cms. cms works with private contractors especially in the original medicaid, the fee-for-service program to perform the day-to-day program operations such as paying claims, enrolling providers and conduct the first level appeals. in parts c and d of medicare cms contracts with private insurance companies to deliver medicare's benefits. in either case cms is ultimately responsible for making sure that the medicare trust fund dollars paid to these contractors are used appropriately and soundly. we know from past experience that without strong ov

mr. waxman that has been on that panel is retiring. he'll be gone soon. >> there you go. >> i think the stocks should discount the elimination and determination and the extinction of congressman henry waxman. not personal. just policy. >> it definitely was one of the catalysts that resulted in selling off today. >> seema mody, thanks very much. director at tjm services and jeff killburg and o'neil securities. i do not want to talk about henry waxman. that is just too boring. what i want to know about is how good it is that janet yellen -- this might have been a freudian slip or whatever but i'm going to argue it's healthy for the economy. >> and i'm going to be right there with you. i thought she did an excellent job. i was actually offended the next day when some people called her saying it was a rookie mistake. she never should have said it. i'm thinking, what are you talking about? everything is on the table and people need to understand that. on wednesday when the news came out, it was sold off. there was no volume. it was this ligh

mr. waxman: i thank the gentleman for yielding to me. the truth of the matter is no matter how many votes the republicans cast to repeal the affordable care act, and no matter how many distortions they spread about the law, there are some facts they cannot change. they cannot change the fact that because the affordable care act nobody in america can ever again be denied health insurance because they have a pre-existing condition. they cannot change the fact that a woman can never be charged more than a man for the same coverage. they cannot change the fact that a family will never again be left without coverage just because their child's hospital bills got too high. these facts are stubborn. they are inconvenient for my republican colleagues, so they ignore them and they deny them. republicans have voted or will today 50 times to try to take away the basic security and freedom guaranteed by the affordable care act. they offer absolutely no solution for the tens of millions of americans who need health care coverage that is secure and aff

mr. waxman. they have been two champions on the subject of health care in america and doing so in a fiscally sound way. and while i appreciate the concerns that they expressed here, and i share them, and i will speak to that, i do think that we have to think carefully about the decision that we make. i know that they have. this is an example -- the leadership bringing this bill to the floor on the short fuse that the expiration date is march 31 without most people in this room without ever having on what is in the bill what is a missed opportunity. we should be considering right now a bill that would permanently, permanently speak to the s.g.r. for those in the public, i know it's inside baseball talk, s.g.r. that is the rate that docs are compensated for treating medicare patients. so don't think of s.g.r. think of the patients. and that's what we're doing here. think of the certainty that they need in terms of their health care, and that is our seniors. think of the certainty that a permanent f

mr. waxman, you have a minute remaining. >> in state versus cheri which is the florida supreme court decision that established this rules that if your lowest score or your only score is 71 you are out and that applies with you take one test or multiple tests. i am quoting from the supreme court's decision, quote, is a universally accepted given that the sem is a universally accepted given and as such should logically be considered in determining whether ed dependent has mental retardation. what the court said it was we have to read the plain meaning of the florida statute and the florida statute says two standard deviations. one notion that the florida legislature -- may i finish my sentence? the florida legislature is the people of florida have made it considered decision not to account for the sem is baseless and is the lie by the legislative report that accompanies the statute which said 70-75. .. >> to add history and context to the current situation between russia and

mr. waxman of california. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. waxman: mr. speaker, i thank the gentleman for yielding to me. i know that this legislation carries important personal significance for some of our colleagues and i respect that. but i want to express some real concerns about the bill because i feel it's overly broad. it could seriously undermine the affordable care act and would establish a bad precedent for our tax laws. the bill state this is a individuals would not be required to obtain health insurance coverage if they're, quote, sincerely -- if their, quote, sincerely held religious beliefs, end quote, cause them to object to treatment this is a would be cover the bill does not narrowly define sincerely held religious beliefs as those of christian scientists or other groups who rely on a reals you method of healing. as a result, the bill would force the i.r.s. to either accept virtually all attestations of exemption or determine which americans' religious beliefs meet that standard. this is impossibly difficult to enforce and frankly it is

mr. waxman. i agree. that's why i'm calling for a time-out. for a amoratorium.et the house get revolved and due process to occur. the president complaian't keep huge changes willy-nilly under you no constitutional authority. >> we have liberal left lawyers like jonathan turley saying you'll rue the day. >> he keeps doing it and in spite of what david was talking about, he's not offered the republicans anything about changing the law except what he wants to change. because he won't do free market reforms. he won't give -- this law, this report says it will hurt working middle class people who make about $20,000, $40,000, $50,000 a year. they will end up paying more and having less in their paycheck because of it. >> and they wind up in medicaid. which is a poor man's medicare which has no doctors -- by the way, they're in the going n note with the part d drug thing. they're furious at that. >> vulnerable democratic senators are saying there should be more chance. democrats are running away from this, at least the ones that are vulnerable. >> we're missing a prett

mr. waxman? >> mr.hief justice, may it please the court, and atkins versus virginia the court held execution of persons with mental retardation. persons with significantly some ,verage intellectual function with an onset before the age of 18. because of the standard error of measurement inherent in iq tests , it is universally accepted have obtainedwho scores of 71 to 75 can and often do have mental retardation when those three prongs are met. the statistical error of measurement -- >> the line has to be drawn somewhere. in atkins we did say that we would leave it up to the state for the standards on this issue. what is the rule that we announce today? 70 is not ok? 75 would be? i am not quite sure. let me first take some issue, with all due respect, to your characterization of atkins. it is not that we leave it to the states to establish the standards for the clinical condition of mental retardation. what you said was we leave it to , the task of developing appropriate ways to enforce the constitutiona

mr. waxman? >> mr.hief justice may i please the court we hold the constitution barthatthe constitg persons with mental retardation that is persons with significantly subaverage intellectual function can print with deficits and adaptive behavior with an onset before the age of 18. because of the area of measurement that is inherent on the tests it is universally accepted as persons with a obtained scores of 71 to 75 km n and often do have mental retardation when those are met. the measurement -- the line has to be drawn somewhere and we did say he would leave it up to the states to determine the standards for this issue. so what is the rule that we announced today? seventy is not okay but 75 would be? how would you announce the rule? >> witney first take some issue with all due respect on the characterization. what the court said is not that wwe would leave it to the states to establish the standards for the condition of the mental retardation you said we leave it to the states the task of developing app

mr. waxman. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. decades ago, many thought that head injury was serious only if a player was completely knocked out unconscious or suffered a severe contusion. after frequent painful blows, even a young athlete could continue to play. but we now have strong indications that the effects of repeated brain trauma in sports, even those received during one's youth, can accumulate the consequences that are long-term debilitating and even life-threatening. these consequences can stem from injuries once considered minor known as sub concussive blows which may not be accompanied by any immediate adverse symptoms. serious psychological and emotional disorders have been documented among former athletes that have suffered repetitive brain trauma. researchers a number of times have found evidence of the neurodegenerative disease when examining the brain tissue of dozens of deceased former nfl players. new technologies have enabled to show the metabolic changes in the brain associated with concussions and sub concu

mr. waxman: mr. speaker, i ask for a roll call vote. the speaker pro tempore: does the gentleman ask for a recorded vote? mr. waxman: i ask for a roll call vote on final passage. the speaker pro tempore: a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the .s. house of representatives.] the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 229, the nays are 183, the bill is passed. without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. for what purpose does the gentlelady from ohio seek recognition? ms. fudge: mr. speaker, under rule 9 i give notice of my intention to offer a question of the privileges of the house. the form of the resolution is as follows. whereas on march 5, 2014, during a hearing before the

mr. waxman. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. decades ago, many thought that head injury was serious only if a player was completely knocked out unconscious or suffered a severe contusion. after frequent painful blows, even a young athlete could continue to play. but we now have strong indications that the effects of repeated brain trauma in sports, even those received during one's youth, can accumulate the consequences that are long-term debilitating and even life-threatening. these consequences can stem from injuries once considered minor known as sub concussive blows from a which may not be accompanied by any immediate adverse symptoms. serious psychological and emotional disorders have been documented among former athletes that have suffered repetitive brain trauma. researchers a number of times have found evidence of the neurodegenerative disease when examining the brain tissue of dozens of deceased former nfl players. newman to technologies have enabled to show the metabolic changes in the brain associated sub concussions a

mr. waxman, and others have said they would be voting against it. but i do not know what will actually happen after we hear the debate and the rest. having no idea where most of our members are on it, because it is a recent development. darkve been kept in the about it, basically. weighing the equities i think it is really important that seniors not be turned away. it is really a bad choice. an irresponsible, bad choice, but the only choice we have. i said i would be supporting it. no, we are not whipping the bill. they're making our own judgment. is against thea bill. some others are supporting it. they will just have to make their own judgment on it. any other? yes, sir. >> i wanted to ask you about the national labor relations board meeting yesterday [indiscernible] do you think -- i know you are supports as -- you are a sports fan. you think that they should be paid for what they're doing? >> i only read this about the paper this morning. --s is a regional nlrb board is it a decision, or recommendation? i would just have to see. players shoulde

mr. speaker. chairman upton, chairman whitfield and ranking members waxman and rush, all of you for working with us to move this bipartisan legislation today. mr. whitfield, i want to particularly thank you for your leadership on the subcommittee. and thank you to my colleague, david mckinley, for partnering with me on this issue. mr. mckinley has an extraordinary background as an engineer and small business owner, real practical knowledge that has been extremely helpful and he's brought invaluable expertise to our committee. i'm grateful to him, this whole body should be grateful for his partnership. this bill today has good ideas advanced by members of congress, representatives eshoo, rogers, matheson, latta and castor and thank all of them for their leadership on this issue. and lastly, i want to thank house leaders, especially majority leader cantor. he and his staff, steve, have been enormously cooperative in dealing with some of the thorny problems that arise whenever there's a complicated piece of legislation to be considered. so thank you. like mr. whitfield, i have long believed that energ

mr. waxman and ranking member have introduced their legislation to temporarily bring no blocking and non-discriminationes in as the fcc adopt its new home rules. i think going back to what gus just said, i find it interesting what the fcc tried to do act in 2010 chairman genachowski was exactly a very broad set of guiding principles or guiding roles that will be applied on a case-by-case basis. i don't see how that was different and the vision that everyone has agreed upon, and of course we had the support of the community, major providers. the only one that challenged it based on authority reasons, not just the rules, was verizon and look where we are today. and so i think certainly i think the fcc should move beyond just net neutrality to look at sections as a whole. it is a very broad authority. they will likely give the fcc plenty of difference. >> it will come as a surprise to nobody that shawn and i disagree on this. my bosses have been very clear that the few net neutrality and have since its inception of the open-ended principle as a solution in search of a problem. the d.c. circuit remanded th

waxman-issa exchange. he said i didn't take it to the point of racism. take a listen. >> mr.irman, i must insist that we go to regular order. >> the gentleman is not in order at this time. >> mr. chairman -- sphoeup did you -- >> did you have -- >> the rules of the house call for an alternating -- >> the gentleman will cease >> point of order, mr. chairman, on what time does the chairman speak and ask these questions -- >> we'll furnish you a copy -- >> there are multimedical multimedical -- multiple members that will yield you time -- >> it didn't come down to racism when it comes to point of order and the rules. he said if he could have done it again, he would have sat back and let mr. cummings speak for a few minutes. >> when democrats were in charge of that same committee and that is how he was treated as a minority member, darrell issa was. >> here's the great thing. a phone call happened. he reached out to elijah cummings. elijah cummings said i forgive you, let's move forward. they have a bit of legislation they are going to be working on together so they had to get it

mrs. clinton that pete stark was, quote, one of the more disliked members, and also described fellow california democrat henry waxman then a subcommittee chair, as a medicaid guru widely unpopular with states and governors. this draft of a letter to the archbishop of philadelphia on abortion drew, as you can see, heavy editing from the 42ant president, and this shows mr. clinton striking a reference to al gore as an extraordinary partner in favor of calling him a close friend and steadfast partner. the documents also showed senior officials voicing concern that russian documents relating to lee harvey oswald turned over to washington might be doctored to embarrass the u.s. bret. >> our resident historian, james, thank you. >>> it's been a legislative priority for decades, yet action on immigration reform has gone virtually nowhere. carl cameron on making deportation humane. >> it was supposed to be all about the irish with st. patrick's day looming, but the president had undocumented immigrants from south of the border on his mind. >> there's no reason why we can't do for this generation of immigrants what was done

mr. brune there is a bill he supported that was utterly ridiculous. i assume he is talking about the waxman-markey bill. i didn't take it personal but i like the company i'm with. we have the edison electric institute endorse it, the nuclear industry dow chemical dupont united auto workers united steelworkers dow corning applied materials utility workers all the way down the line. we had the industry on our side. the chamber of commerce wasn't with us, no question about it. i like who we have. i don't think the edison electric institute was with us. i think they understood where we have to go to could are checked the climate in greenhouse gases by the year 2015. so this is a further extension of what's going on. the oil industry is pushing to reverse four decades of law prohibiting the export of american crude oil so that our crude oil can be shipped to china. there is a crude oil band right now. they want it lifted. as we debated here yesterday the natural gas industry is pushing to use the crisis in ukraine as a basis for unleashing natural gas exports to china because that's where it's g

waxman was in charge of the very committee. when democrats controlled the particular controlled congress. here's what happened then in 2008. watch. >> mr order at this time. >> mr. chairman, the rules of the house -- >> the gentleman -- >> the rules of the house call for an alternating -- >> gentleman will cease. >> on what time -- >> point of order, mr. chairman. on what time dutz the chairman speak and ask these questions. the rules of the house -- >> we will finish -- >> mr. chairman, i would ask that you -- >> i will have you physically removed from this meeting if you don't stop. >> and this is different because darrell issa was still speaking when he adjourned the meeting. >> i'm going to call the cops if you don't shut up. >> i don't think anyone called henry waxman a racist. can we agree unless they do something racist that we're not going to call them racist? >> it's also stupid. it's used too much. it's too powerful a term to misuse. >> and you can almost sense it coming when something like this unfolds. >> when is jesse jackson going to come out and speak? he did weigh in. let me know what you think about this. meanwhile, mo