by virt you of the bill that is -- virt you of the bill that is before you. why? because we have a right to expect that these regulatory agencies that congress sets up will do their job with the significant sums of taxpayer money that they are provided by this congress, the money that comes from the people of america to do their job in a timely fashion. and this agency comes for the forth and tries to act like it doesn't have the money or the authority to investigate violations and enforce the law within six months of a violation. that is not true. the american people have a right to expect more from the agencies than that. more to the point, the reason we are here today is really simple. we are here to overturn a rule that is blatantly unlawful and does nothing, i repeat nothing, to improve workplace safety. we are here to put a check on the very stop of executive overreach the congressional review act sought to address. by blocking this punitive and overreaching rule, we will firm congress' commitment to pro-act i have health and safety policies that preven

the title of the bill. the clerk: house calendar bill to h.r. 375, a designate the federal building and united states courthouse located at 719 church street in nashville, tennessee, as the fred d. thompson federal building and united states ourthouse. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. barletta, and the gentleman from georgia, mr. johnson, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from pennsylvania. mr. barletta: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and and their remarks include extraneous material on h.r. 375. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. barletta: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. barletta: h.r. 375 would designate the federal building and united states courthouse located in nashville, tennessee, as the fred d. thompson federal building and united states courthouse. i'

that is what the timeline and the bill are all about, messaging. not resold or reform but is political messaging. this is the fulfillment based oo the premise that is no longer sustainable. expanding coverage and improving benefits banned discriminationee against women and people with pre-existing conditions and disabilities and prohibited and will lifetime limits ons coverage. they keep some of those on theo bill and they voted 65 times two repeal the benefits.re isn't perfect of course not but in the areas it's fallen short lets fix it together.pay this bill making americans payor more for less well for the healthcare system into turmoilca and put millions of families at risk. that's why the impose it in hospitals oppose it and whyhy senior organizations oppose it. there are literally a thousand organizations that have opposed the legislation and we are hearing reports that they are making secret backroom deals to desperate maneuver that shows how unpopular this is. we must remember they will be responsible for what happens to the health care sys

they think about the bill. what it is is jamming through a bill and not allowing the providers, the doctors, the patients, the insurance companies, all of the stakeholders to have an opportunity to read that bill introduced about 72 hours ago now, little more than that, maybe close to 96. that, mr. speaker, is not regular order. and i will tell my friend for whom i have a great deal of respect, i think he puts the best face on it, but nobody believed the republicans had a bill, mr. speaker, until monday night. well, actually, i believe they had a bill the last colloquy and i looked all over this capitol and i couldn't find it. it wasn't posted. the ranking member on the committee didn't have it. no committee democrat had the bill. they couldn't read it. so to pretend, mr. speaker, that hearings on some other bill at some other time in some other congress suffices for regular order is something, mr. speaker, i cannot agree with. and if the situations were reversed, as i have experienced over the last 36 years, t

of the bill. as of right now, you have a lot of conservatives think they cannot support the bill in the current form. you also have a lot of water thing if the changes that the conservative wing are seeking, they -- are seeking are made, they can no longer support the bill. it puts the bill between a rock and a hard place to get to place for both moderate and conservative can support it. >> assuming it is a party line vote, how many republicans can the speaker afford to lose before he is afraid of losing the bill? >> he needs to 18 to pass it, which gives them leeway. they did account last night and the house freedom caucus chairman mark meadows said anywhere between 40 and 50 members would be no on the bill right now. that would beugh to sink it on the house floor. house leadership has work to do to make sure they have enough votes before they come to the floor. changesdepends on what leadership is a minimal -- amenable to making. like really back medicaid expansion. you have a number of senators

procedures in the bill. the purpose of a class action is to provide a fair means of evaluating like claims, not provide a means of artificially inflating the size of a class to extort a larger settlement vafment exempting a subset of money damages from the bill, as this amendment would do, would serve to incentivize artificially large classes to extort larger and unfair settlements from innocent parties for the purpose of disproportionately awarding uninjured parties. any claim seeking monetary relief for personal injury or economic loss should be grouped in classes in which those who are the most injured receive the most compensation. why should civil rights claimants seeking money damages be subject to particularly unfair treatment by being allowed to be forced into a class action with other uninjured or minimally injured members only to see their own compensation reduced? that does a disservice to those claimants. yet, that is exactly what this amendment would do. further, the bill's provision on attorney

we had a very vigorous and open debate about the bill, about the effects of the bill and about the things which were occurring within the republican majority dealing with the united states senate, dealing with the president of the united states. all three are necessary to agree upon a bill if we are to sign it into law. there was a vigorous demand from democrats to know more information, and i believe i forth rightly attempted to answer those questions. we did not have all the pieces of the puzzle together. we recognized that by the evening hour. and so about 11:00 last night upon my consultation with the gentleman, the ranking member, mr. mcgovern, i made a decision that we would not stay up during the evening. we would ask that we would come back today, so we did not actually complete our work last night. i am here today because last night the rules committee issued a rule, a rule that would be a same-day rule. the issues really don't change. the facts of the case really don't change. information is necessary for us to make an informed decision. that is a change. i told the gentleman, m

in the bill. i thought, ok. mr. lujan: make no mistake. today is about the american people. the reason this bill went down is because thousands of thousands, if not millions of people have been gathering around america demanding answers as to why americans were doing -- republicans were doing what they were doing. why republicans had such a terrible bill in front of them that would devastate american families. that is what today is about. there were 15 republicans that are in some of the most competitive districts in america devoted yes on this bill. the rules committee, the ways and means committee, the energy and commerce committee, and the budget committee. their constituents deserve answers as to why they were voting yes on this bill which was horrible than, and horrible today. we will continue to take this .ight to the american people i want to thank the constituents across america who made today possible. we will continue to reach out to them and maintain the trust all the way through novemb

anybody think the senate bill will look like the house bill? no. there'll be senate discussions on what go in the house bill and a committee to reconcile the differences and then it will go back to the house and senate and it may be pinged back and forth several times. look, the bill as it stands today won't be the bill that ends up getting passed and signed by president trump. that's the reality of the legislative process. but as we go through the process it's in -- incumbent from all sides to say it's no different than obamacare. that's not true. it kills the obamacare mandates on the individual and company and penalties with it and kills a trillion dollars in obamacare taxes and $100 billion of the subsidies for exchanges and discrimination under young people and young people pay more for their insurance to subsidize older people and gets rid of limits on hsas and other things it gets rid of under obamacare and with a new reform framework that is really exciting. >> bill: well, you're a buyer that's what i take from the last comment. >> i'm a bu

the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 1353, a bill to amend the homeland security act of 2002 to require certain additional information to be submitted to congress regarding the strategic five-year technology investment plan of the transportation security administration. the speaker pro tempore: the question is, will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill. members will record their votes by electronic device. it this is a five-minute vote. -- this is a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representative proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.] the speaker pro tempore: on this vote, the yeas are 414. the nays are 2. 2/3 being in the affirmative, the rules are suspended and the bill is passed, without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania -- >> mr. speaker. by di

back the bill. listen. >> there's a lot of emotion in the room. people feel strongly about trying to find a way to -- their convictions and looking for ways to do so. >> i haven't whipped the bill, i don't know where each of the freedom caucus votes are. mark meadows is the one keeping the head count. i can only speak for himself and i am not going to vote for this bill because i believe it's bad for america. one of the worst bills i've ever seen. >> the meeting was probably one of the most inspiring meetings i have attended in my 15 years of congress. >> reporter: why is that? >> because i stood amongst some to have greatest statesmen i've ever had the privilege to be around and to hear their heart and cause to human freedom. >> let's go to dana bash at capitol hill. you have been following this all day long, tell us about speaker ryan's meeting with president? >> reporter: we don't know exactly what happened in that meeting in particular, meaning what the president said to the house speaker about

hoyer: the third bill and the fourth bill. mr. mccarthy: those will be later in the month. next week we'll have two of those up. mr. hoyer: will we -- are they available now to be reviewed prior to them coming up later in the month? mr. mccarthy: the committee has marked them up. mr. hoyer: ok. lastly, and i know you're glad to hear that comment, as are the folks waiting for one-minutes, have received a letter from secretary mnuchin on march 8. it was directed to the speaker. mr. leader. and like most secretaries of the treasury, he is hoping that we will pursue financially responsible and competence-building policies. i won't read the whole letter. but he says in the last paragraph, as i said in my confirmation hearing, honoring the full faith and credit of our outstanding debt is a critical commitment. i encourage congress to raise the debt limit at the first opportunity so that we can proceed with our joint priorities. mr. speaker, i ask the majority leader whether that is going to be scheduled in the near term, because on march 15 we met the debt limit extension. this a

the gop bill for obamacare. club for growth president david macintosh responding with a statement, quote, president trump was elected because millions of americans wanted a full repeal of obamacare followed by free market health care reform that would give them competition, choice and lower prices. this bill became a frankenstein meant to appease the insurance industry and republicans who really want to keep parts of obamacare. now it is time to do the right thing. joining me david macintosh, club for growth president. there is not a lot of momentum for republicans. you heard the president. he will move on to tax reform. did you move your opportunity by pushing folks to say no to this one? >> you know, melissa i think there is a way forward with this bill. i think the president has led in a very good and strong way. unfortunately speaker ryan started out with a bill that was the wrong one. he tried to leave major parts of obamacare in place. the way forward i think is to take the president's three stages, the th

the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. cloil union calendar number 136789 a bill to require the administrator of the federal emergency management agency to submit a report requiring certain plans, regarding assistant -- assistance to applicants and grantees during the response to an emergency or isaster. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. barletta, and the gentleman from oregon, mr. defazio, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from pennsylvania. mr. barletta: i ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days to revise nd extend their remarks. in the aftermath of these disasters, while facing the devastation and the daunting task of recovery, many communities encounter even more challenges caused by fema which has been there -- been seventh there to help. i continue to hear from my colleagues in congress about conflicting guidance received from fema officials who constantly change on the ground. i have heard stories of lost docum

bills, labor health bill, the interior bill, the agriculture bill, etc., etc., in a similar manner? that means considering them on their merits discreetly, separately, individually. i yield to my friend. mr. mccarthy: i thank the gentleman for yielding. the gentleman knows we are working in part the continuing resolution short time. -- short term. it is my intention once we pass the f.y. 2017 defense bill i will keep members updated on further floor schedules and bills but it would be my goal to continue to pats the rest of the appropriation bills. mr. hoyer: i appreciate that, that that's your goal. i hope we can pursue that goal. frankly, we believe that the scenario is being set up to take kear of the defense bill, i voted for the defense bill and i was one of those people, i intend to vote for the defense bill this -- next week when it comes toths floor, if in fact as the gentleman represents it is substantively the same as the bill that we've already adopted. what i am concerned about and what members on my side of the aisle are concerned about is nondefense aining discretionar

the presidents bill. every american should know that if republicans ultimately passls this bill, president trump is behind it and republicans would have helped him every step of the way. so voters, particularly trump supporters who would be hurt most by this trump care should remember that when your premium starts going up, president trump did that. when your insurance does not cover all of the things that use two, president trump did that. if you are older and insurance companies are now charging you exorbitant premiums, several times what they used to be, president trump did that. what 24 fewer americans have health insurance while the wealthiest americans get a huge tax break, you can be sure that president trump did that too. even now, the changes house republicans are making to buy off different factions of their caucuses are making the bill more harsh. some of these changes willx is further weaken medicaid and result with your americans with health coverage. republicans claim they're fixing the unfa

in the bill? >> yeah, that's been the hard part. >> because that was the argument under obamacare. >> there is a good knowledge. >> if you take individual things like medicaid work requirements is my favorite example. i read more about it today, which is something i'm sure, i'm sure that you're a pan of. >> absolutely. >> if you look at the details of that, 62% of people who are women who are not working on -- sorry, on medicaid 62% of the people who are -- who would benefit from it who are women, wouldn't be able to get medicaid because they wouldn't be able -- they are not working. i just messed that up. there are a lot of people who rely on this that don't know what is in this bill and it also requires that women who just had a child, if they are on medicaid they are required to go back to work within 60 days. that is two months. as we start talking about the specifics in this bill before it goes to the senate, people will hate these pieces of it and it will be real to people. >> i suspect the

bill, that make good refinements to the bill to make it better. we want to make sure we keep the consensus so that we can actually pass the bill. when we pass the bill here in the house, it can be brought up for a vote in the senate and not filibustered. so that's the key balance that we have to maintain while we go through this process. >> dana: you wrote the bill, i'm assuming there would be no support from the left. they were going to be against it. >> i don't think people who created obamacare will be working with us. >> dana: did you expect the strong push back from the right? seems like the seniors groups aren't happy, the veteran groups aren't happy. some people say it gives tax cuts to the rich. and that you're basically the reverse robinhood. how do you respond to that? >> i would say obamacare is a collapsing law. double digit premiums this year, higher next year. basically forced insurance monopolies. five states, one plan left, 1,000 counties one insurer left. insurers are pulling out. the thing is collapsing. people are trying to comp

by the way, in the poll, 12% thought the bill would be good for them. this is not a very good bill. it was a tax bill disguised as a health care bill. the biggest transfer of wealth in the history of our country. $600 billion or more going from working-class families to the richest people in america. by the way, having 24 million people not having access to health insurance, and at the same time, undermining medicare and jeopardizing pre-existing condition benefit that we had in our bill as they repealed the essential benefits. one of the most interesting speeches to me on the floor was when one of our colleagues, who i love and respect -- by the way, i grinned everyone -- grant everyone their position we have , a debate on it, but at least admit you have a bad bill -- any one of my colleagues got up and said, i was not for the bill, but they really made it better last night when they repealed the essential benefits in the bill. [laughter] i thought, ok. mr. lujan: make no mistake. today is about the american people. the reason this bill went down is because thousands of thousands,

the point is, why not put it in the house bill? this is what i would recommend to the republicans when this comes back, as it will. probably in the fall or theca winter when obamacare begins to implode. at that point, put everything in the house -- >> bill: and let the democrats take the rap. >> that is exactly right. >> bill: it doesn't help the folks. e they will still pay for the next six to nine months, more health insurance premiums, higherlk premiums. yes, the chess game goes on in congress and who gets hurt? the regular folks. charles krauthammer, everybody. next on "the rundown," dr. austan goolsbee, former obama advisor, will weigh in on the washington swamp. later, attorney general jeff sessions cracking down on the sanctuary cities. the threats are now getting very specific. those reports after these messages. very my business was built with passion... but i keep it growing by making every dollar count. that's why i have the spark cash card from capital one. with it, i earn unlimited 2% cash back on all of my purchasing.

the chair lays before the house n enrolled bill. the clerk: h.r. 1228, an act to provide for the apointment of members of the board of directors of the office of compliance to replace members whose terms expire during 2017 nd for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1, the chair declares the house in recess subject to the call of the chair. that has been pushed back until 3:30 this afternoon. we plan to have that live swrl. the house has gaveled out subject to the call of the chair and until such time they are ready to move forward, we can't tell you exactly when they'll come back in. president trump getting into the lobbying effort releasing a ideo and a release here on washingtontimes.com, trump urges americans on health care, let congress know you are behind our plan. former president obama, though, defending the affordable care act which was signed by him seven years ago today. obama defends health care law on eve of repeal vote. they say the part of the president's -- former president's state

the bill later today. live now to the floor at the u.s. senate here on c-span2. the chaplain, dr. barry black, will lead the senate in prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. o eternal god, who rules the raging of the sea, you are our guardian and friend. place your arms of protection and wisdom around our lawmakers, shielding them from life's pitfalls and using them for your glory. be their refuge in pain, their a very present help in trouble. may they rejoice because of your mercies serving you with grateful hearts. turn the night of their distress into the morning of your hope causing them to wait patiently for the unfolding of your loving providence. may they feel your everlasting arms beneath them and find peace in your presence. we pray in your great name. amen. the president pro tempore: please join me in reciting the pledge of allegiance to our flag. 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 a

changes that improve the bill that -- and refine the bill, the big pieces are all there. the president, i think he just got off the news, he was meeting with the republican study committee that you and i cut our teeth on. he worked with them and they are they with these president and the rest of us have been talking about improvements. those improvements are being made as we go through this process. it is basically more federalism, making sure that we respect the fact that states can experiment taylor medicaid to meet their needs and as we get through this what we're finding out is, this is an exciting time. i know what is happening is people are saying i wish you had this or that reform in this bill , the challenge for us in the bill is we have to work with the senate rules, and the senate rules are pretty tight on this thing called reconciliation, which means you have to write a bill that cannot be filibustered. you cannot put everything you want in a bill otherwise it will be filibustered and it will be a showboat, it will be a phony fake vote. about a lot of votes oba

he voted against the amendment that said read the bill. think anybody cap us opportunity to read the bill before it marked up. greg walden, chairman of the energy commerce committee, also in july of 2009, the bill of this significance you would think it would at least allow people to come and who are affected by the extraordinary changes in this bill and have a chance to let us know how to fix them. that was greg walden, now the chairman of the energy commerce committee, july 9, 2009. he is now in charge of that committee agreed not to single witness testified on the bill that was marked up in his committee, and it was marked up ,hrough the dead of the night if we want to parse our words, because it started in the morning on wednesday. it did not end until the morning, 26 hours later, thursday. this meant that mr. walden kept and their seats marking up a bill except when they were voting coming over here, for 26 hours straight. 1 -- on one of the most consequential bills this house will consider. and that the senate will consider, affectin

pass the bill. that is a big number, but the freedom caucus who are very much opposed, there are more than three dozen of them. they have to get those folks on board for this to pass. without losing moderates. balancingn a tough act. they have done all they can do. this is the best they can get in repeal oretting any replace measure out of congress. the president is ready to move on if he is not going to get this deal. >> we will continue to follow your reporting, susan. examiner andgton twitter. thank you. >> the rules committee meeting tomorrow morning come alive on c-span two. in.cows -- houses gaveling members debated the repeal measure earlier and the same day rule that allowed them to take it up on the floor. here is today's debate. igh-- yester, the rcomme met r so 1 hoube little bit m, where wwere ft fro the repcan t erceew bl tt e thefable care act that diussiolved us kingesmony from t comi kev brad ys mns airmanf thenergy and omrce cmiee, greg walden, and thitte airmn budget, mk. also volv

yanking the bill was better than losing the bill. the other point i want to make is it's too bad a lot of these tax hikes will not be repealed. yesterday i spoke about -- >> the original bill was a $900 billion tax cut. whether it was on the medical key advice tax, capital gains tax. >> right. >> that now is -- that's not going to flow through. >> right. this was very important to the economy. i believe one of the reasons the economy has been slow for so many years is obamacare and tax increases. cap gains tax, 3.8% i calculated could be worth 1,000 points. that's not going to happen. >> more importantly though is the topic we are all anxious to debate which is what needs to happen now, larry, so that the house freedom caucus will support raising the debt ceiling, making corporate tax reform that will increase the deficit? infrastructure funding, are they going to get behind those? is this ideologically problematic? >> there are two things. one is a question and financial economic question. the freedom caucus is pro growth and supply

of the replacement bill. this is 45 minutes. >> thanks very much. our next

the bill wh

health care bill following the release of the cbo report. they spoke to reporters at the capital. rep. pelosi: good afternoon. well, the accounting is an. this cbo has reported that the republican bill pushes 24 million people out of health care. off health coverage. this is a remarkable figure. it speaks so eloquently to the cruelty of the bill that the speaker called, "inactive mercy." i don't know if he thinks it is an act of mercy to the people who will lose coverage, people who will lose jobs, hospitals that will close down in rural areas. i don't know if he thinks this is an act of mercy for people on opioids who look to medicaid for answers, like many republican governors do. they are taking 24 million people and pushing them off their coverage. they areey do so, implementing the biggest transfer of wealth in our history. from workinggoing families to the richest corporations in our country. in terms of insurance coverage, this is immoral. theerms of giving money to rich at the expense of working families, it is indecent and wrong. th

the bill. but it has no future. not a future in the that may not even -- may not even be constitutional, may not pass the senate. but senate. so as i say, if the that's good negotiating, there's a weak partner in the negotiation. but that list is news to me. >> these are just some recent reports. but nonetheless, people in this house will have to vote on this. >> let me say this if i can answer the question, and i'm willing to entertain any feedback, don't get me wrong. i haven't moved very far since bout 10:00 this morning. you. ve and i've really not had many people whistering in my ear and i've got no e-mails on this. it would not surprise me. but let me say this you. and i've really not had many people in fairness you're a no, you're a no, you're all a no. and that we get. and so it would not surprise me if somebody is negotiating up to tonight. it wouldn't surprise me at all. as a matter of fact, i would encourage that. and i've tried to make my comments very open about saying we would all

tomorrow the bill goes back to the commons. if it gets through without the amendment then things go as the government plans. if the lords decides to step in again and put forward more amendments, potentially that could delay things, but if things go as the government hopes tomorrow, potentially it could be in a position to trigger article 50 by tuesday or wednesday. as we heard, the brexit secretary has urged mps to leave the bill for exiting the eu unchanged when it is debated again in the commons tomorrw. david davis wants mps to reject a proposal by peers for the bill to guarantee a "meaningful" parliamentary vote on the final exit package. but several tory mps could oppose the government or abstain from the vote, which could take place as early as tuesday. joining me now on the line is mp alistair burt, who has said that parliament must get a say on any final deal. what do you make of david davis's comments? and assurance, which we have already had, in relation to a final vote on the deal, and that the house will also get a

bill that passed the senate. in the bipartisan bill senate eventually that we said let's do that bipartisan bill -- madam leader, with all due respect, it's very difficult when democrats control the senate and a minority of republicans vote for something to get it thraw body where republicans are in the majority. that's happened on immigration. that's just politics 101. >> no we didn't control the senate. that wasn't -- this is when we were in the minority. but let me go to your other point. the the bill that was passed the mandate is a republican idea. developed at the heritage foundation. >> actually you were in control of the senate. >> romney care. romney care. that's what it was in massachusetts. for the -- for the -- affordable care act. myself, i would have had public options. i would have had public options. but that wasn't what would be the consensus. and one of the things that you might learn from us is that we only can pass a bill when we build consensus from the members up. and that's why we had drill

that will be the bill. if they don't have 218 votes, there will be a negotiation and conservatives will have a seat at the table. the house freedom caucus has enormous power if they stay together, so do the conservatives in the senate. its aunknown what the product will be but everybody assumes there's going to be a negotiation or they wouldn't be making all these phone calls and ranging all these appointments with conservatives in the house and the senate. that's the way it should be. conservatives want a seat at the table and we want to repeal obamacare. every one of us want to. i still think the most practical way is to separate them, but if they were to remove the objectionable items from their repeal and replace, it would essentially be repeal. so we're really talking about the same thing. >> last question over here. go ahead. >> you're talking about how you focused on repealing as much as you can. weren't you saying earlier in the year that republicans have to be very careful about doing repeal withou

can make good changes that improve the bill, that refine the bill. the big pieces are all there. and the president -- this is where he's -- i think he just got off the news. he was meeting with the biggest conservative caucus in congress called the republican study committee you and i cut our teeth in. he just worked with them. and they're all on board because with the president and the rest of us they've been talking about improvements to this bill. those improvements are being made as we go through this process. it's basically more federalism, making sure that we respect the fact that states can experiment and tailor medicaid to meet their needs. and as we're getting through this, what we're finding out is this is an exciting time. and i know what's happening is people are saying gosh, i wish you had this or that reform in this bill. the challenge for us in the house is we have to work with the senate rules and the senate rules are pretty tight on this thing called reconciliation, which means you have to write a bill which cannot be filibustered. a

the bill that was going to pass the house. the senate was never going to be able to pick it and you happen pa pass it. >> what is the next item on the agenda. >> tax cuts. infrastructure. >> no, no, no. ryan said the first issue is border. >> the first thing on the agenda is well wall, part of the spending package which is coming up. that's true. not going to be a lot of money. about 2 or $3 billion. >> are you trying to get sean spicer's job. >> no, i don't want his job. i will say this. >> they lost. you know what the word loser means. how can you not say loser. trump says it all the time. >> we lost, but we also won. we have the rest of the agenda to focusen. had the approval rating of 17%. very unpopular. they can go back. >> joy, we're coming from baghdad. that was the bomb. >> let's go to a couple thoughts. i want to split this a little bit. seems to me i'm not sure you're right act the republican party. there are a lot of regular republican districts where people are moderately conservative. bucks county, fitzpatrick. s

bill supplied for the states. that's not now going to happen and therefore he won't be able to deploy that policy tool that we think is better than obamacare. we do lose a lot of tools we wanted to help improve people's lives and bring down health care costs in this country. thank you very much, everybody. reporter: do you have confidence in your whip? mr. ryan: i do. thank you. >> house minority leader nancy pelosi and ranking democrats also spoke to reporters. this is about 25 minutes. ms. pelosi: thank you. good afternoon. i'm very proud to be here with the house democratic leadership, the unity of our house democratic members was a very important message to the country that we are very proud of the affordable care act. yesterday, as you know, was the seven year anniversary of the president signing the bill, and the american people expressed their support for it. that message became very clear to our colleagues on the republican side of the aisle. today is a great day for our country. a victory for the american

it's in the bill. families are facing over $10,000 deductibles in many cases because of the unworkable mandates and taxes in this bill. families have been begging for relief from this law and saying give us freedom. let us make our own health care choices. no un-elected bureaucrat in washington should be able to tell you what you can or can't buy in such an important personal decision. i applaud not only the chairman and other colleagues here in the house, i applaud president trump for working with us to bring forward a bill that's commonsense that lets patients be in charge of their health care decisions so we can lower costs and actually put them back in charge of this very personal decision. we -- mr. walden: the gentleman's time has expired. the chair recognizes the gentlelady from colorado for one minute opening statement. ms. degette: thank you, mr. chairman. mr. chairman, even though the majority has refused to send this bill for a score to the c.b.o. before we mark it up, the american enterpris

the first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. all points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. general debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the committee on veterans' affairs. after general debate, the bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. it shall be in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the five-minute rule an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of rules committee print 115-7. that amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be considered as read. all points of order against that amendment in the nature of a substitute are waived. no amendment to that amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be order except those printed in part a of the report of the committee on rules accompanying this resolution. each such amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the report, may be offered only by a member designated i

what the bill actually does, the bill has to pass the energy and commerce committee. every state gets the same allotment from 2016 that they had. so there's no changes in there are programs. what it does is it allows it to grow from 2016 forward at cpi medical. and there's some discussion even about -- for elderly population, disabled, maybe having more generate growth in that group. the other is in demographics because if you put a flat cap on medicaid and you have -- i'm the end of the baby boom, so i'm 53. so by the time i'm 65 we're all going to be retired. the elderly costs more in the medicaid system. so if you just put a cap and you didn't account for demographics and hopefully as the economy improves you also have fewer people in medicaid but not because they were -- i'm talking about the traditional medicaid, not the expansion population. so we think that what actually the traditional medicaid program will be as it is today with growth for medical inflation and adjustment for demographics. we think that makes it sustainable. we're not bumping 2026 and spendin

"the factor" begins right now. ♪ >> bill: hi, i am bill o'reilly. that is the subject of this evening's "talking points memo." irrational thinking, that is a subject of this evening "talking points" memo. for those of you watching us, you have seen a change in "the factor." it used to be i was a god with everybody, nobody how crazy they were. in fact, use to people -- we had congressman barney frank on, after we played a tape of him saying that the federal mortgage system was fundamentally sound and not in danger of going under, he actually denied saying that, even though he listened to the tape of his own words. that resulted in a very loud confrontation. i could give you scores of other examples. but we don't do that much anymore. their rationality in some precincts, the dishonesty of some zealots, the absolutist area that surrounds some new stories, is simply tom and incredibly annoying. you get nowhere when you present facts and they are rejected. so, why bother? above all, i don't want to waste your time. last night in our program, "the first 1

read the bill, they had no time to read the bill. cbo issued this report three weeks before any committee voted on affordable care act and so i think senator mcconnell will have real difficulty. his mainstream republicans do not like it because it cuts back on medicaid. and remember, medicaid is for poor people but it is also, 60% goes to people in nursing homes and that affects not only them but their kids. kid 45-years-old or 50-years-old, you could be kicked out after this bill passes. what would you do? maybe have to take them at home. maybe mom or dad has to stop working to take care of them. maybe they have to shell out thousands of dollars out of their pockets. so, it is a loser. and what about opioid coverage question mark so many of our republican senators have made a campaign, justifiably, of trying to get more opioid coverage. since medicaid covers opioids, there's trouble there. then you had the conservative republican senators who think this bill goes, you know, too far. so, senator mcconnell has had a very difficult job

the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: a bill to amend the homeland security act of 2002 to provide for certain acquisition authorities for the under secretary of management for the department of homeland security and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from louisiana, mr. higgins and the gentlelady from new jersey, mrs. watson coleman are recognized for 20 minutes. mr. higgins: i ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include any extraneous materials on the bill under consideration. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. higgins: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. higgins: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise in strong support of h.r. 1252, department of homeland security acquisition authorities act of 20717. the department of homeland security has been routinely criticized over the years by watchdogs at the government accountability office an

bill and get the bill passed. member, it's a three-part plan. first, a bill that we can use reconciliation for that they cannot filibuster. that's where you can repeal the individual and business mandate. that's where you can repeal the spending and the taxes paired that's where you put in the republican healthcare tax policy , high risk pools, health savings accounts, tax credits that equalize tax treatment of health care. the physical moving parts we can do in reconciliation. part number two and tom price just came to our conference two hours ago and worked our members through the enormous regulatory flexibility that he has. when they wrote obamacare they wrote this thing in harry reid's office christmas eve 2009. they were going on the fly and they basically said there's a lot of stuff we can'fi out let's just have the secretary figured out, so they put 1442 provisions in obamacare in the 2700 page bill picked our 1442 sections at the secretary may or shall giving tons of discretion for the secretary of hhs to

that will be the bill. if they don't have 218 votes, there will be a negotiation and conservatives will have a seat at the table. the house freedom caucus has a power if they stay together, so to the conservatives in the senate. it is unknown what the product will be, but i promise you, the white house, the cabinet, and everybody else assumes there will be a negotiation, or they would not be arranging all these appointments with conservatives in the house and senate and that is the way it should be. conservatives want a seat at the table and we want to repeal obama care. everyone of us wants to. i still think the most practical way is to separate them, but if they were to remove the objectionable items from the repeal and replace, it would essentially be repeal. we really are talking about the same thing. >> go ahead. >> you are talking about focusing on appealing as much as you can. didn't you say earlier in the year that republicans had to be very careful about doing a repeal without replacement? >> i am

, that we have read the bill and for 72 hours, on the internet for the bill to be disclosed. >> you know we're being generous -- >> i appreciate your generosity. >> thank you. i'm prepared to rule. before i do that, i would love a copy of that right minded amendment i offered many years ago. >> i got it for you right here. pass that down to the chairman. >> about time your legislative agenda turned conservative. >> mr. chairman, chairman brady? will you yield for one minute or 30 seconds? >> reluctantly, yes. >> is there a recording of how mr. crowley voted on the brady amendment? >> mr. chairman, i don't know if there was, but i'll tell you one thing -- mr. chairman, knowing how much of a fair minded person i am, i think i voted in favor of it is there any record i voted no? is there any record i voted no? oh, alternative facts have struck again. >> the amendment is not germane to the amendment in the -- >> clause 7 by adding a sense of congress that is broader than the pending substitute amendment. the sense of congress refers to reconciliation legislation which is mr. tiberi pointed o

tomorrow the bill goes back to the commons. if it gets through the commons without the amendments, things go as the government planned. if the lords decides to step in again and put forward more amendments, potentially that could delay things, but if things go as the government hopes tomorrow potentially it could be in a position to trigger article 50 by tuesday or wednesday. we have had assurances on other things, other things have not been written into the bill, such as an assurance from the government that it would intend to bring forward a vote even if there was no deal. it is important to us and a lot of members. parliament started this process by starting the referendum process. we ought to be there at the end. if at any —— for any reason the government has to come to parliament and say we have not been able to reach a deal going forward, it is so important that i am sure the government would want an endorsement in parliament before the next stage of the process of leaving the eu is completed. that is the agenda for u