WASHINGTON – U.S. Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, ranking member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, today made the following statement before the Rules Committee on H.R. 3962, Speaker Pelosi’s health care bill.
“Thank you Madam Chair, Ranking Member Dreier and other members of the committee. I do appreciate the opportunity to testify here at the Rules Committee on the health care bill which we expect to come to the floor in the very near future. Before I get to substance of my testimony on the actual bill, I think it’s interesting to see what happened today. They announced the unemployment rate hit 10.2 percent. We also have been able to compare the two CBO scores from the last bill that came out of committee and this bill that was introduced this week. In these CBO scores, we see that the number of uninsured American citizens has gone up from 8.5 million to 12 million. While at the same time, the number of uninsured illegal aliens decreases from 8.5 million to 6 million. Millions of more Americans are unemployed today, according to the Department of Labor. According to CBO, millions more uninsured citizens compared to the previous bill that was released, and millions fewer uninsured illegal aliens. That doesn’t sound to me like very good health care policy.”
“But, onto the reason why we are here today – we’re here to consider H.R. 3962. The first bill was a thousand-page bill. This bill is closing in on 2,000 pages, without the changes we know are going to be made in the committee rules. The first thing I’d like to ask, Madam Chairwoman and members of the committee, is that the eight Republican amendments that were accepted at the Energy and Commerce Committee, but that have been stripped from this bill, be reinserted. Now Chairman Waxman is not here but if he were here, I think he would back me up. Of these eight, he supported all but maybe one. There may have been one of these eight amendments that he opposed but the others he accepted. It’s puzzling that they’re not in this bill.
“I’m going to briefly summarize these eight amendments. One was a Buyer amendment dealing with veterans issues that would have allowed a veteran that’s enrolled in a VA health care/Tricare system to obtain coverage through the new health insurance exchange, in addition to their VA and Tricare package. The second one is a Burgess amendment which would ensure that all qualified health plans under the bill have a reasonable and accessible utilization review and appeals process. The third was a Whitfield amendment dealing with a moratorium on reimbursement cuts to ambulatory surgical centers. The fourth was a Rogers amendment that would have prevented the federal government and private insurers from using federal comparative effectiveness research for care rationing or limiting reimbursement levels. Dr. Gingrey had an amendment that said that the government could not dictate to physicians how to practice medicine. Mr. Shimkus, and this is one I really don’t understand being struck, Mr. Shimkus, who is a Christian Scientist, had an amendment accepted at committee that would add language ensuring that there is no religious discrimination for patients seeking spiritual care under plans in the new Health Insurance Exchange. As we all know, Christian Scientists do not believe in the traditional practice of medicine and have their own separate medical facilities. Mr. Shimkus’ amendment would have allowed that to continue. Mr. Walden had an amendment that would ensure that the demographics of the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission accurately represent the demographics of Medicare recipients. Mr. Walden had another amendment that would have ensured that the new ‘Health Benefits Advisory Committee’ established in the Democratic legislation accurately represents the interests of rural Americans. That amendment was also struck. I would hope that those amendments would be made or put into some amendment that is folded into the bill.
“I would also ask that the Republican substitute be made in order. We do have an alternative that Congressman Camp has talked about that is truly an alternative and should be considered.
“Finally, I hope you allow enough time for debate. With 435 members, on an issue that is probably the most important issue this body is going to debate, we should have enough floor time so that every member that wishes to speak can speak. I would ask for more than the normal time.
“Again, it’s always an honor to come before the Rules Committee and I thank you for your consideration.”
Click here for a chart on the CBO analysis.
