it was a tax bill that had by constitutional authority had to originate in the house of representatives. so then the other body had the perfect vehicle. take the housing bill, strip out the housing language, put in the health care language, pass it on christmas eve and we'll gather back after the new year's eve festivities and create a conference committee and pass the president's signature health care legislation. but it didn't happen that way. and then the elimination opponent on the democratic side began in sequential form such that by march 23 of last year, enough democrats had changed their votes and would support the senate-passed house bill and the question, will the house now agree to the senate amendment on 3590, the answer affirmatively. was that the end of the story? no. this was ostensibly litigated in the political arena last fall. what was the judgment of the american people after the litigation in the political arena? the answer was, we don't want it. we don't want any part of it. fix it. do something. so chairman rehberg is doing exactly that today. within the limits that he is constrained by in a continuing resolution. he is providing the vehicle, the floor by which the implementation of this very flawed process, this very flawed piece of this very flawed law can now be contained. it was important before, but three weeks ago it became critical. it became critical because of judge vincent's ruling. why is that? i encourage my colleagues to go to the ruling, it's available on the internet. it's not hard to read. it's about 75 pages. the judge's ruling, page 76 of 78 because the individual mandate is unconstitutional and not severable, the entire act must be declared void. pretty clear language. now, why is it necessary to approach the funding? because earlier in his opinion judge vincent observed that there is a long-standing presumption that officials of the executive branch will adhere to the law as declared by the court. as a result, delayer torrey judgment -- declaratory judgment is the functional equivalent of an injunction. that should be enough for members of the executive branch, but apparently that is not so because what we see today in our committee hearings, in the headlines in the newspapers, is that this administration is proceeding at light speed with implementation. the previous health care czar is now the deputy chief of staff in the white house. what does that tell you about their plans for implementation? in fact, the plans for implementation were going so fast that one of the chief architects of this limitation was hired a month and a half before the bill was signed into law. that's testimony we heard in our committee in energy and commerce this past week. i sent a letter to secretary sebelius this week asking her to provide for us what direction she was going to take in light of the ruling. i'll submit that for the record. but i thank the gentleman for bringing this limiting amendment to the floor today. it is critically important that this congress act to limit the implementation of this very flawed health care law. let's get back to the work the american people asked us to do in the election. i yield back to the gentleman. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentlewoman from the connecticut. ms. delauro: three minutes to the gentleman from california, mr. miller. the chair: the gentleman from california is recognized for three minutes. mr. miller: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the chair: without objection. mr. miller: i thank the gentlewoman for yielding me this time. the author of this amendment said a few minutes ago that this was a very simple and straightforward amendment. and that's probably true for members of congress. who have government paid health insurance, have policies that are looked after by people make sure we get benefits. but if you are a member of the american public this is not a simple straightforward amendment. if you are a member of the american public, this amendment changes your life for millions of americans. for millions of americans and for millions of their children. for millions of their parents. this amendment changes their life. this isn't straightforward. so many of our new republican colleagues have come to town and said, i'm just one of the folks back home. i'm not enamored with washington. i'm one of the folks back home. vote for this amendment and you won't be like the folks back home. vote for this amendment and you'll be very different than the folks back home because you'll have insurance and they won't. you'll have coverage and they won't. you won't have lifetime caps and they will. they will -- you won't lose your insurance when you need it it for you, your children, your spouse, but your constituents will. you are not just like the folks back home. you are doing grave damage to the folks back home. you ought to think about this amendment before you vote for it. not only does it add $5 billion almost immediately to the deficit, it adds $1 trillion to the deficit over 20 years. takes us in the wrong direction. but this punishes people back home. talk to your constituents who now are the seniors who have that free physical checkup and have been given medicines and told about things that they are doing wrong with respect to their health and now can prevent additional doctors visits and hospital care because of that checkup that they now get that this amendment would take away. talk to the parents and you really ought to talk to the grandparents of the children who now have coverage that didn't have it before. there was concern about the coverage of their grandchildren as they are about their medicare coverage, which you will change with respect to the cost of pharmaceuticals. no, this isn't sism and straightforward, and -- simple and straightforward, and this isn't just like the folks back home. the folks back home are struggling every day to pay their insurance premiums. pass this amendment, and once again the insurance companies can rip them off. once again they no longer have to dedicate 80% of your premiums to your health care. they can write themselves bonuses, the advertising, the salaries, and forget the health care. there won't be that kind of protection for people who struggle every month to achieve health care coverage. for the nine million people who are in the middle of getting rebates now because of the change in the law to make sure that health insurance companies provide you health insurance instead of a funding stream for the executive. no, this isn't simple and straightforward and you are not just like the folks back home once you vote for this amendment. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from montana. mr. rehberg: thank you, mr. chairman. at this time i'm pleased to grant two minutes to the new gentleman on the appropriations committee, a great addition, mr. graves, from georgia. the chair: the gentleman from georgia is recognized for two minutes. mr. graves: thank you, mr. chairman. thank you, mr. rehberg. listening to what we just heard from our colleague across the aisle, he said, go back and talk to your doctors. talk to parents. talk to seniors. you are missing the point. it's time to listen. that's what we have been doing. we have been listening. and the american people in november said it's time not only to defund this but to repeal this measure. again the house has moved forward to do so. maybe you should quit talking to and start listening to. i'm here in support of this amendment because simply put it defunds obamacare bureaucrats. if this amendment is adopted, government bureaucrats cannot be paid so much as to lift a finger, move a paper clip, send and email if it has anything to do with obamacare. the chair: does gentleman yield for a parliamentary inquiry? mr. graves: i would rather just finish my comments here. they have plenty of time. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. graves: since today we are here to talk about save the taxpayer dollars -- >> i don't believe the gentleman needs to yield for a parliamentary inquiry. the chair: for what purpose does the gentlelady from florida rise? ms. wasserman schultz: for a parliamentary inquiry. for a parliamentary inquiry. the chair: the gentleman from georgia must yield before a parliamentary inquiry. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. graves: thank you, mr. chairman. we are here today talking about save the taxpayers' money. let's remember the cost of obamacare. $2.6 trillion over the first 10 years once it's implemented. $560 billion in new taxes on american families and businesses. unconstitutional mandates, higher premiums, yes, lost coverage. the law is so damaging that the obama administration itself has granted at least 915 waivers for health plans and organizations. think about that. saving 2.5 million people from obamacare. let's save the rest of america here today and let's support the rehberg amendment and move on and zero out the payments to those obamacare bureaucrats. thank you. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentlelady from florida rise? ms. wasserman schultz: mr. speaker, is it a violation of the house rules wherein members are not permitted to make the disparaging reference to the president of the united states in two previous gentlemen's statements on the amendment, both of them referred to the affordable care act, which is the accurate title of the health care reform law, as obamacare. that is a disparaging reference to the president of the united states. it is meant as a disparaging reference to the president of the united states and clearly in violation of the house rules against that. the chair: the gentlelady has stated a hypothetical. the chairman will not rule on a hypothetical but will urge all members in this discussion to engage -- refrain from engaging in personalities or descriptions about personalities in general. the gentlelady from connecticut. ms. delauro: mr. speaker, i yield myself 30 seconds. to the prior gentleman i would just say, you didn't listen to the people of this country, you sold them a bill of goods. you told them you are going to create jobs, you were going to reduce the deficit, and turn the economy around. you have done none of this. you have been here six weeks, eight weeks, and you have not done anything. with this amendment you will indeed by the c.b.o. numbers increase the deficit as soon as next year by over $2 billion. with that, let me yield three minutes to the gentleman from new jersey, mr. pallone. the chair: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized for three minutes. mr. pallone: thank you, mr. chairman. how many times are we going to hear about repealing the health care reform instead of having an initiative that actually creates jobs? i go out, the gentleman from georgia said, are you listening to your constituents? yes, i listen to my constituents. they tell us we should address job creation and the economy. and not constantly argue over and over again about repealing health care reform which we know is going absolutely nowhere. so when i listen, that's what i hear. jobs. the economy. not this constant repetition of repeal. i have a lot of respect for the gentleman from montana, i have to say, but he talks about completely stopping and defunding implementation. the reason that the republicans are saying that and want to defund this is because this health care reform is already working. insurers now can't drop someone's coverage when they get sick. seniors are saving money on prescription drugs. young adults to 26 are getting back on their parents' insurance. and small businesses are receiving billions of dollars in tax credits to provide health care coverage. this is moving along. this is working. -- this is working. the defunding amendments will end all these benefits. putting health insurance companies back in charge of american's health care. the only person who benefits from defunding and repeal are the special interest health insurance companies that want to charge more and continue their discriminatory practices. the gentleman from montana talked about the cost. the fact of the matter is that if we pass these defunding amendments, in the guise of budget austerity, they are one step towards repealing the largest deficit cutter passed in the last decade and that's the affordable care act. the health care reform helps tremendously in reducing the deficit. it will save $230 billion over the next 10 years and over $1 trillion in the 10 years after that. . if we defund health care reform will thereby no prohibition on discrimination against 100 million americans with pre-existing conditions, no prohibition on insurance companies canceling your coverage when you get sick, no prohibition on lifetime caps and annual limits, no required coverage for young adults on their parents' policies, no assistance to seniors struggling to afford the cost of drugs in the doughnut hole and no free annual checkups in medicare. no tax credits for families and small businesses to pay for health insurance. repeal and i stress is a boone for the insurance companies, but an enormous setback for american families. if we pass this amendment the insurance companies can raise their rates without review or transparency, they can deny coverage to millions of americans with pre-existing conditions and they can cut off coverage when someone becomes sick. i urge all members to vote no on these defunding amendments. the health care reform is working. i go back home and people are pleased with it because already in many cases they're able to get insurance they weren't able to get before. this, and i'm tired of hearing this over and over again, concentrate on jobs and the economy, not this charade. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from montana. mr. rehberg: thank you, mr. chairman. i yield myself one minute. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. rehberg: i respectfully do refer to it as obamacare. you would think that he would want his name attached to his signature legislation. but in four quick years this congress and this president has made what is a spending problem into a spending crisis. we wanted to create jobs, you wasted time on the health care reform that did not control the costs. they call it the affordable health care. unfortunately all it did was add people, it didn't control the cost of health care. that's one of the reasons it needs to be repealed. we wanted to build an economy, they wanted to build government. so we called it what it is. it is obamacare, it's a travesty, it is big government, it is not controlling health care costs and it needs to be repealed and today we're going to try and defund it to the best of our ability and we're not -- if we're not successful this time we're going to try again and again and again until we either have a senate that's willing to pass it or a president that understands that we cannot do this to the american people. at this time i yield five minutes to my good friend from iowa, mr. king. the chair: the gentleman from iowa voiced for five minutes. mr. king: thank you, mr. chairman. mr. chairman, i thank the chairman of the subcommittee of appropriations on h.h.s., congressman rehberg, for yielding. and want to declare my support for this amendment and i think he's happy if i refer to it as the rehberg amendment. i want to also thank danny rehberg for the work he's done on this. america will never know, mr. chairman, how much work went into crafting this amendment, to get this fix that does a little bit to take us down the road and, boy, it is important to me to see $100 million cut out of the resources that would be used to implement obamacare. and, mr. chairman, i'm also very confident in declaring it to be obamacare. i listen to president obama address it as obamacare on february 25 of last year at the blair house during the health care summit. i thought that was the source of the moniker, obamacare, was the president himself. and if anyone, you know, thinks otherwise, i think they should look back and check the record. obamacare is this, it's not $1 trillion in deficit over 20 years if we don't go through with this atrocity, it's $2.6 trillion in spending in the first full decade according to the chairman of the budget committee, paul ryan. $2.6 trillion in spending, we're here in this c.r. to cut spending. we know that we have to go into a national era of austerity because of the overspending that's taken place over the last four years in particular and the last two years in a hugely significant way. we're looking at a budget now that's proposed, a deficit proposed by the president of $1.65 trillion. and if you roll back to the full federal outlays in 1997, $1.6 trillion. the budget items in 2002, $1.6 trillion. we have that much deficit proposed by the president, we want to shut off $2.6 trillion worth of irresponsible spending, we want to preserve the liberty and the freedom of the american people and the best health care system in the world. that's why you see sheiks' plains landing in places like rochester, minnesota, to get health care they can't get in other places of the world. this country, we need to preserve the system we have and expand it. the rehberg amendment helps slow down this implementation that is going on in an aggressive fashion by the obama administration. now, i happen to have in my hand, mr. chairman, this is an excerpt from a c.r.s. report that tells you how due police to us this bill read, once one picked it up and read it, the 2,500 pages. in here are multiple place, over 50 places, where obamacare actually not just authorizes but it also appropriates, not completely unprecedented, but it is the largest, most substantial effort to trigger automatic spending that goes on in perpetuity, mr. chairman. the number here is not $100 billion. the number on this c.r.s. report is $105.5 billion over the next 10 years. and in the bam of this fiscal year it's $4.95 billion that we're having trouble getting at. thanks to mr. rehberg, we're getting at $100 million. i believe this amendment will pass today and it will go on this c.r. and become a significant leverage point over the united states senate. other components of this that need to be ripped out, now, oh, wait, i forgot to remind you again, h.r. 2, full repeal of obamacare, i was pleased to see language that i had worked on and drafted for all those months went over to the senate where every republican voted to repeal obamacare. here we had bipartisan support for the repeal of obamacare, three times the bipartisan support described by then speaker nancy pelosi and we sat here now with america that has 2/3 of them by the polling has rejected obamacare. in this bill, another piece that reads deceptively is this, the authority for the secretary of health and human services to do interdependental transfers and any amount greater than the 2008 budget bill. which means slush funds all through that department to aggressively implement obamacare, the rehberg amendment shuts off some of that, probably not all of that, but it gets at it and it lays the point out and i hope that we can do better on some of the others into the future. we also need to understand that when america has rejected a piece of ledgeslation that so upsets all of our lives and takes away so much of our liberty and freedom, takes away our ability to buy heament insurance policy that is high deductible, high co-payment and low premium, that we have many more good solutions that will unfold here. this bill is unconstitutional in four places at least two, federal courts have ruled so. we know that it will eventually get to the supreme court and we can never say with certainty what the result will be but we though the certainty of the two federal courts, mr. chairman. and we must have the rehberg amendment so the american people are dealt with the respect and honor -- the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. king: h.r. 1 cuts the funding, h.r. 2 repeals. thank you, mr. chairman, and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentlelady from connecticut. ms. delauro: let me just reiterate again this amendment would not create jobs, it would not do anything to reduce the deficit. in fact, by the c.b.o. numbers it would increase net budget authority in the bill by $2 billion next year. a total of $5.5 billion over the next several years. it increases the deficit. let's keep hitting it on that point, mr. levin of michigan is recognized for two minutes. the chair: without objection, unanimous consent is granted and the gentleman from michigan is recognized for two minutes. mr. levin: if this amendment would become part of the c.r. there will be no c.r. and that will be your responsibility. your responsibility. this is an effort to repeal by paralysis, paralyzing the provisions that have gone into effect, pre-existing conditions for children being covered, children under 26 having the ability to get insurance. it would paralyze the efforts to begin imple meant -- implementing the 2014 benefits. instead of searching for common ground, this amendment intensifies warfare. instead of collaboration this amendment would mean chaos. the republicans have become a wrecking crew led by paul ryan and wrecking medicare. this amendment is a deeply dangerous prescription for americans' health. this prescription needs to be >> democratic leaders are spending'so be it' bill, talking about the possibility of federal job losses. >> good afternoon, we are in the sixth week of the new republican majority and we have yet to see republicans address the number one priority. they have not put forth one jobs bill to create one job. democrats and the american people have been repeating a simple refrain -- show us the jobs. the gop is not just ignoring jobs, they are cutting them. today, we continue to debate a republican spending bill that cuts jobs, weakens the middle class, and does not reduce the deficit. bill will destroy 800,000 american jobs according to the economic policy institute. it would increase class sizes and take teachers out of the classroom. imagine what this means to people across the country. the class size in your school may be increased. my own granddaughter told me that was not a good idea. she is 11 years old. it would jeopardize homeless veterans, make our communities less secure, and all the republicans can say about this is loss of jobs, large class size, problems for americans homeless, so be it. from the beginning, democrats have said we will measure every proposal by if it creates jobs, reducing the deficit, strengthening the middle-class. this continuing resolution fails on all three scores. when we must work together to create american jobs, job creation must be our top priority. in recent days, we have heard talk of a government shut down. let's remove all doubt -- we all have a responsibility to make sure that there is no government shut down. the last thing that the american people need is for congressional republicans or democrats to draw a line in the sand that hinders keeping the government opened. closing our government would meet our men and women in uniform would not receive their pay checks and veterans would lose critical benefits. seniors would not receive their social security checks and central functions from food safety inspections to airport security could come to a halt. when president bush was in office and i was speaker, we met with minority leader john boehner and representatives of the of ministration to itself critical issues facing our nation, negotiating a stimulus package a couple of years ago. that was to help the middle class with a financial package to save the economy on the brink of a financial disaster. we worked with the administration and mr. boehner to halt the steep fall that our financial institutions were about to take. we did not want to do it. the democrats did not create the problem. it was the president bush solution very republicans did not want to vote for it and we cooperated with president bush. the idea of cooperation in a bipartisan way to do the right thing for our country is one that we have to keep uppermost in our minds. as we see this flood of amendments that every idea anyone could ever think of, it is interesting but it is not what needs to happen. what needs to happen is we need to establish priorities. it is not everything you can think of. it is those things that must be done for the american people and their top priority is the creation of jobs. we must have a continuing resolution that does just that -- make it a priority for job creation, deficit reduction, and strengthening the middle-class. no i am pleased to yield to the distinguished democratic whip, steny hoyer. >> can thank you very much, madam later. we have as the speaker indicated been here for two months. we have been here for two months and we have that taken a single action to create jobs in america. we have done two major things that will undermine jobs in america. first of all, we adopted a rules package. that provided for an additional $5 trillion in deficits. we hear a lot about cutting spending but the rules package provides for the cutting of revenues by $5 trillion without any way to pay for it. therefore, even if the republicans accomplished what they say they want to, a $100 billion cut in spending and we believe there needs to be cut and spending, and the president of united states has offered a budget which cuts over $1 trillion over the next 10 years in spending. the fact is, the republicans have now offered a continuing resolution which puts us on hold. we have said we want to out- educate, out-innovate, and out- invest and build our competitors in the global marketplace. in terms out-educating, republicans have offered a substantial cut in education. they have made it tougher for kids to go to college. 200,000 teachers may not be kept on teaching our kids. they have cut 20,000 researchers from the national science foundation, undermining our ability to innovate and compete in the global marketplace. as tom donahue, the president of united states chamber of commerce as observed, they have cut infrastructure which would have -- spending in infrastructure which would have created tens of thousands of jobs. unlike the democrats who came into office to stabilize and to build and to create jobs, the republicans who went through some election we did and heard america's cry for jobs and growth in the economy, their response has been simply political. we should not be surprised. i want all of you to ask yourselves -- what was the long- term impact of the contract with america? i think you will be hard- pressed to say that the bills that we focused on in 1995 made a difference in america. very frankly, in these first two months, i think you'll be hard- pressed to say that we have made a difference for america. that is unfortunate. we want to work with our republican colleagues. i mean that sincerely. i have had the opportunity during these first two months to sit down for significant periods of time with mr. kantor, the majority leader, with mr. mccarthy, the republican whip, with mr. camp, chairman of the ways and means committee and i have had an opportunity to have a brief discussion with mr. hensarling. i have told all of them that we want to work together and reach across to create a common cause for solutions to america's challenges. i am hopeful we can do that. one way that america told us very loudly in 1995 is not the way to do is to shut down government. i will work very hard as the leader said with all of my democratic colleagues and hopefully my republican colleagues to make sure that we do not shut down our government. we don't want to do that. we hope our republican colleagues don't want to do that, but if the posture they take is our way or no way, then it is possible that will happen. it will not happen that if we work together, which is what we want to do. we saw the negative consequences of that in 1995. our republican colleagues thought that was politically advantageous and hopefully they don't repeat that mistake again. i yield to the assistant leader , mr. jim clyburn of south carolina. >> thank you, mr. whipple. leader. all of us remember during the lame duck session three or four months ago, we heard agochanting from the other side, "where are the jobs?" far the last six weeks, it has been anything but tubbs. it is rolling back women's rights, repealing consumer protections, making it harder for students to go to school, balancing the budget on the backs of working families, veterans, and young people. and now, they are putting social security payments and services at risk. the social security administration is responsible for processing benefit applications, issuing checks to recipients, and sending new social security cards to children. in a letter to its employees thursday, they warned that they may have to furlough workers if the proposed cuts to this budget are enacted into law. in the gop bus 'so be it' spending bill, they have cut funding by more than 9% to social security. from $11.8 billion in 2010, to $10.7 billion this year. in addition, the republican proposal provides for $1.7 billion less than social security needs to keep pace with inflation and the rising were close. these are the wrong priorities. democrats have said that we will make every -- measure every effort by whether it creates jobs, stresses the middle class, and reduces the deficit. democrats agree with president obama, that we must out- innovate, out-educate, and out- build the rest of the world. we believe we can live within our means and create jobs, invest in our future starting with an aggressive attack on waste, fraud, and abuse. i hope that when we get back from this break that we can work together on behalf of the american people to move our country forward. >> we must make it so that the american people can make it in america. this is the key anniversary of the recovery package. the republicans and their lack of job initiatives, one week and one day after the president paused and ocular address and we passed the in august -- the recovery package. much more needs to be done. that's why we want to see some initiatives on the part of our republican friends. i want to mention before we go into questions and answers that as we gather here, in wisconsin, we are watching an extraordinary show of democracy in action with workers, teachers, and public services having a seat at the table. i stand in solidarity with the wisconsin workers fighting for their rights, especially the students and young people leading the charge for fairness and for opportunity in their community. we will be pleased to take any questions. >> in 1995, we have a large freshman republican class beckham into office. -- that came into office. here we have a large conservative freshman republican class. do you get the sense that this class does not understand what happened in 1995? do you see parallels here? >> we were all here at that time parap. i don't want to characterize what their understanding is of the issues. it is important for us to recognize that we cannot allow the government to shut down. it is important for everyone to say what they would like to see happen, but they must establish priorities as we go forward and the country cannot afford the luxury of a political standoff. you cannot say ,"so be it" when it comes to the welfare of the american people. talking about what happened in the past may be a nice academic exercise but the fact is we have a whole different set of challenges for the american people right now. whatever it was an however urgent the needs of the american people were 16 years ago, it has all intensified now. the republican platform the'so be it' cannot be how we proceed. we have to see how we can make it happen for the american people and it is up to the leadership of their party to bring them together a around a set of priorities to take to the negotiating table and make sure that government does not shut down. >> i agree that looking back is not particularly useful unless you learn from the past. what we learn from the past is that the american people wanted an efficient, cost-effective government. they understand that government is necessary. they don't want to see it shut down. the lesson learned is that when that occurred, they did not like it. they will not like it this time either. i hope my republican colleagues come together with their colleagues in the house and with our colleagues in the united states senate to reach agreement on moving forward. i think that is the key. i hope they will do that and we will see if that is the case or not. the implications, however, have been recently that there are some who believe that their pledge is not subject to change. that pledge of course was made unilaterally. in december, we would not have been able to keep middle-class taxes at the present level and not raise them on less we have reached agreement. we can all take a lesson from that that the legislative process is a process of coming together and reaching common ground. we need to do that. >> i believe we were advised years ago that if we fail to learn lessons of our past, we are bound to repeat them. i would hope that our colleagues on the other side are that will read. well read. >> [inaudible] a want to ask you a bet planned parenthood and the health care reform law. what is your action on both issues? >> let's talk about the repeal of health care. what that does is increase the deficit. the health-care bill, as we know, represents a savings of $1.30 trillion to our budget. the repeal that has been suggested is about $250 billion cost to the taxpayer. does not create jobs and it creates -- and increase the deficit and does not strengthen the middle class. what you saw the members do was to say that they are really the end of discrimination on the basis of a pre-existing condition. over 129 million people under the age of 65 have a pre- existing medical condition. almost every family in america has someone with a pre-existing medical conditions include today, republicans in the congress said we want you to be discriminated against if you have that. for children under 26 years old to be able to stay on their parents' policy until they are 26, the republicans said my kids can take care of themself. good for them and good for you. these kids want to take care of themselves, too. they need to have access to quality health care so that they can take the jobs they want and a job that matches their talent and aspirations, not just a job that has health care. the list goes on whether it is closing the doughnut hole or caps on benefits are removed. they have voted to put the insurance companies back in charge. i don't think this will happen. that is what the vote was about today. increase the deficit, it weakened the middle class, and it did not strengthen -- it did not create jobs. in terms of planned parenthood, it is very interesting for me to listen to the debate because i have spent many years with my colleagues on the appropriations committee. we also have the domestic and foreign ops family planning initiative. over and over again, our republican colleagues on that committee would not give this a bug because they do not support family planning, domestically or internationally. they do not support family planning domestically or internationally. it was stunning to me because i am a mother of 05. my oldest child was turning 6 when i brought my fifth child, so i feel i have credentials in this arena, more than perhaps some of the people who speak about it on the floor of the house. what they did last night was used planned parenthood as a whipping boy to disguise their opposition to family planning. the american people knew and every time we tried to tell them, they said it cannot be true that they oppose family planning. they don't. it was terrible to behold last night for them not to be able to come right out and say they are not for family planning but to say they are not for planned parenthood. when we took votes in previous congresses, we had seen this in the votes. this is a very dangerous situation for the reproductive health of women across the country. women of the country and others who care about the must pay attention to this issue. it is degrading to women and disrespectful and it does not make any sense and if you want to reduce the number of abortions in our country, you must commit to supporting contraception and family planning. they have never understood that and perhaps we have to have a lesson in the birds and bees for them to understand that. listening to the debate on the floor was so surreal. what standing do they have on this issue? how can they characterize this when what we know is they do not support family planning. the american women should know that. i think that says something about this but they should make it a big priority. instead of job creation, they want to repeal health care. then they came out with hr3, a conglomeration of disrespect for women and they are expressing it again and this continuing resolution. it is cause for great concern and i am very proud of our members who sounded the alarm and the few republicans who voted against that amendment. many of our pro-life members spoke out against that resolution. >> the three of you have decades of experience on the appropriations committee and witnessed the power of the president in determining ultimate outcomes on appropriations. we have seen votes on health care, planned parenthood, global warming one on mexico city. do you believe president obama will have the same success as president bush and president clinton ad in driving out comes and being successful in knocking this stuff off? >> you have heard me talk about this. presidents ultimately have the power to fashion and direct spending can policy. they do so through their veto. you talked about a couple of presidents who did that. i maintain it was president clinton that brought us to $5.60 trillion surplus because he did not allow the reduction of revenues or the increase in spending that would have brought spending and revenues out of kilter. unfortunately, president bush did allow that. we turned a $5.60 trillion surplus into a substantial deficit. your question goes to the fact, can president obama do the same? absolutely. i think he will do the same. i think he is committed, focused, and determined to accomplish the objectives he set forth for the american people in 2008. he did not do anything he did not tell the american people he would not do. he wants to expand the economy and make accessible health care for our people, and make our nation safer here and around the world. united know that the states senate will present either the house or ultimately the president with a bill that will confront him with that alternative. the united states senate is not going to pass this bill. i don't think frankly any house republican believes the united states senate will pass this bill. there has been no effort, in my view, to come to common ground on these issues within our own house or between the senate and house. i am hopeful that in the days ahead that mr. boehner and the republican caucus and ourselves will come together with the united states senate to reach agreement on how to move forward. i am hopeful that we will do the same on the budget and i am hopeful that we will pursue with be thes know to central concern of the people which is jobs. i have little doubt that president obama will have the ability and will shape the policies as we go forward as he promised the american people he would. >> i am convinced that the president is watching this debate very closely. i am convinced he is treating all of these though it's and the results of these votes with the same kind of incisive vision that he put into putting this budget together. if you look at the president's budget proposal, there is pain there for everybody. as i have gone through it, there it -- it is a tremendous balancing act that he has performed in doing this. if you look at some of the cuts, the services like community health centers, in order to provide services that might be needed because of cuts that take place in other places in the budget, same thing with education. when people got a chance to look at what he did with pell grants, they saw that kind of incisive thought being put into it. i am convinced that he will be watching this entire process on the day cr with the same kind depth and size ofness and he will use his pen to bring all of these actions back into balance. >> mr. hoyer talked about his -- talked about the president possibility to do this. i would also like to say that the president has respect for the ideas of others. he knows that if we will come together on this, we have to all come together on it. that is why it would be important for the republicans to get serious about what their priorities are and not bring 500 amendments to the table but to say what helps reduce the deficit and create jobs and strengthen the middle class. there is nothing partisan about that. it is what's important to the american people. without any question, the president knows the seriousness of the situation and how we have to get the job done. i did not like what president bush wanted to do on the stimulus package in the winter of 2007? i did not like that proposal. i wanted investment in science and research and the rest and the president wanted tax cuts. we said ok, how do we come together to help the people? we worked together to say that everybody has some benefit and how we go forward. it was not our preference and it was not a question of being in the same category. it was about the same call which was to stimulate the economy. nobody wanted to vote for tarp and most of the republicans did not. we did not leave president bush hanging high and dry because we did not like the problem he created and the solution he offered. something had to happen. that is why we have a difference between this that i see at the moment which i hope will change. other 'so be it' and the from our side if 'let's make something happen.' and president obama is about making something happen. >> speaker boehner has said he will not bring a cr to the floor at current levels. and house democrats work with him to adopt one that has lower levels so you could work out an ultimate deal on this package? >> i don't know what the speaker said about not bring it to current levels. there is not a great deal of time. the senate will have four days to do their bill, reconcile these two bills, and maybe more time is needed. we may add to have a continuation of the current cr. any democrats, republicans or democrats going lines in the sand about what it won't happen if our goal is to make something happen that prevent closing down the government. >> couldn't you reach out and agree to something at a lower level? >> the president paused budget is a good marker for where that is. -- the president's budget is a good marker for where that is. we are talking about saving $1.10 trillion over 10 years. the fact that these two things are coming forth in the same week shows the sharp contrast. the strong commitment for making cuts, reducing the deficit, and on our side, creating jobs to strengthen the middle class is what we hope to see something like that. when we were in that room, it was the speaker, minority leader, and the administration. i was in constant touch with the rest of our leadership on where our corpus was willing to go and we were willing to cooperate. it has to be something that does not undermine the strength of our middle-class, the creation of jobs, or reducing the deficit. thank you all. >> the speaker does not sit as often -- does not say this often, but when we were put intarp together with president bush, i remember the night clearly, when these two people said we will put up 1/3. >> 120-100. >> we agreed to go to/three of the way. at first, they didn't. that weekend, speaker pelosi and said this must be done even if we have to go more than the 2/3. the kind of cooperation that we are willing to give on behalf of the american people is what this speaks to. the speaker mentioned wisconsin. i want to mention wisconsin and ohio. we see what is taking place on the floor of the congress. there is a certain philosophy and movement being played out all across the country. i hope the american people are watching this debate here, are watching the new governor's in wisconsin and ohio and see who -- which party is a part of working men and women who are keeping this country afloat and, i might add, the ones who are keeping this country safe and secure. this, to me, i hope the american people are watching very closely. >> thank you all. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> next, live, your calls and comments on "washington journal." then we looked at afghanistan contractors and a form on the future of afghanistan -- and a forum on the future of afghanistan. philip howard discusses philip howard discusses