Follow us on:
......................................................................................................
Coffee with LeeAn opportunity to meet face-to-face with Congressman Terry to discuss issues important to you
March 6 at Petrow's, 5914 Center Street, 8:30-10am
April 10 at Big Mama's Kitchen, 45th/Wirt on the Turning Point Campus, 8:30-10 am.
Terry Condemns Closed Door Health Care Bill Negotiations
Wednesday, January 6, 2010
Congressman Lee Terry issued the following statement about the House and Senate Leadership meeting behind closed doors to negotiate a final health care bill:
"What are they trying to hide? By ignoring normal open conference procedures the House and Senate Democrat Leadership are once again tossing transparency out the window. President Obama committed to opening up the legislative process to avoid backroom deals, payoffs and other shenanigans we have seen during Senate debate on health care reform. I call on the President to make good on his promise and insist that C-SPAN be allowed to broadcast these deliberations on the health care bill."
Senate Health Care Legislation: the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, H.R. 3590
Monday, December 21, 2009
To read the Senate health care legislation, click here
Terry speaks on his legislation, the 'Local Community Radio Act', H.R. 1147
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Terry: Debt Limit Should Not be Included in DOD Bill
Monday, December 14, 2009
WASHINGTON- Congressman Lee Terry signed a letter to U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi requesting her to not attach a debt limit increase to the FY2010 Defense spending bill when it comes to the floor this week.
“To link the support for our military men and women to raising the national debt limit is insulting to them,” said Congressman Terry. “It implies that our military is the cause of our debt. The real causes are trillions of dollars in stimulus bills and a 12% increase in domestic spending in ’09 and ’10. Pelosi should remove the debt limit from the DOD appropriations bill.”
The U.S. House of Representatives originally passed its version of the FY2010 Defense spending bill in July. Speaker Pelosi plans to use this bill to raise the debt limit from $12.1 trillion to $13.9 trillion.
To read the letter to Speaker Pelosi...
House Approves Terry's RID Act
Wednesday, December 2, 2009
Today the U.S. House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed Congressman Lee Terry's legislation to ban nuclear waste imports into the United States. The Radioactive Import Deterrence Act, H.R. 515 passed 309-112. Congressman Terry is thrilled this bipartisan legislation has passed the House. The RID Act would ban the Nuclear Regulatory Commission from authorizing the importation of foreign-generated low-level radioactive waste unless the President determines it will meet an important or international policy goal. Congressman Terry introduced this legislation with Representatives Bart Gordon (D-TN) and Jim Matheson (D-UT).
Health Care Message
Monday, November 23, 2009
Skyrocketing health care costs have increased the number of uninsured Americans and it is imperative that we address both access and rising costs. Instead of helping the millions in need, Speaker Pelosi wrote the Affordable Health Care for America Act, HR 3962, which will affect all insurance. Reform is needed but this is not the correct path for our country. It is also very disappointing that this bill was written by a handful of people, behind closed doors and passed late on a Saturday (Nov. 7th)night 220-215.
I worry that the Pelosi bill grants too much power to the government over health care and I fear that bureaucrats you can’t talk to will make decision on your health care, not you and your doctor.
Speaker Pelosi’s dream health care bill carries a price tag of $1.502 trillion over ten years, a figure comprised of the cost of expanding coverage ($1.055 trillion), establishing a high risk pool and retirement trust fund ($217 billion) and the Medicare Physician Payment ($229 billion). Less than 1 percent of the bill’s cost is spent in the first three years of the program. The ten year projected cost from the time the program truly goes into effect (2014) is $3.036 trillion. Cost projections for 2020-2029 – a staggering $4.807 trillion. Most of the tab is to be paid by new taxes on small business, individuals, medical goods and $500 billion will be shifted from Medicare. The rest goes to the national debt. I don’t think we can afford this plan and it will, in time, hurt our economy.
The business owners I have talked to say that providing health insurance comprises 12 to 15 percent of their costs, so an 8 percent payroll tax is something they will gladly accept. They will then eliminate their current employee health plans and push employees onto the new government health exchange where a government bureaucrat will steer themto the government run plan. The bill also creates a huge unfunded mandate on the states by raising the level of Medicaid coverage to individuals up to 150 percent of the Federal Poverty Level. This will cost Nebraska, which is already struggling, as much as $100 million.
I offered two amendments to Speaker Pelosi’s bill. The first was my alternative plan called Simple Universal Healthcare (SUH) which creates a new health insurance program similar to the Federal Employee Health Benefits Plan now available to the President, Vice President, Members of Congress and all federal government employees. The plan allows the uninsured and small businesses access to more affordable insurance with options, portability and no mandates.
The other amendment I offered would force the President, Vice President, and Members of Congress into the Pelosi public plan. Both amendments were prevented from a floor vote by Speaker Pelosi’s rules. Speaker Pelosi allowed only one amendment offered by Congressman Stupak (D-MI), Congressman Ellsworth (D-IN) and Congressman Pitts (R-PA) that would prevent the use of tax dollars to be used directly or indirectly for abortion services, except in cases of rape, incest, or health of the mother, which I support since nothing is more important than life.
This amendment was allowed to come to the floor only as a deal to secure enough votes to pass the bill. The “deal” was simply to allow the amendment as no other assurances were made. I have concerns whether or not this language will stay in the bill or be in the Senate version of the legislation. In fact House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-SC) believes the amendment will be removed. Now that the Democratic health care bill has passed the House it is time to focus the attention on the Senate. To date, there is no final version of a Senate health care bill. It has been reported that the Senate bill will cost close to a trillion dollars and will be paid for by placing fees on insurance companies, drug companies and medical device makers. The Senate plan also includes cuts to Medicare and Medicaid and fines for people who do not purchase health care insurance and Senator Reid’s version of a public, government run plan. I am opposed to a government takeover of our health care system and I will continue to be a strong advocate of putting patients first, for a comprehensive free-market approach to reform that drives down the long term costs of health care and increases access.
Educators Town Hall Part I
Friday, November 13, 2009
Educators Town Hall Part II
Friday, November 13, 2009
Educators Town Hall Part III
Friday, November 13, 2009
Educators Town Hall Part IV
Friday, November 13, 2009
Public Option Wrong Way to Achieve Health Reform
By Congressman Lee Terry Monday, November 9, 2009
I have spent the past several months listening to concerned constituents at town halls and talking to several health care providers about health care reform. The message is clear: Skyrocketing health care costs have increased the number of uninsured Americans, and it is imperative that we address both access and rising costs.
Speaker Nancy Pelosi recently introduced a revamped health care bill, the Affordable Health Care for America Act, H.R. 3962. While progress is made in certain areas — for example, by establishing medical homes — the overwhelming majority of the 1,990-page bill advances the agenda of those seeking a pathway to a single-payer nationalized health care system.
While we all agree that reform is needed, this is not the correct path. This new bill has the potential to catalyze a total government takeover of our nation’s health care system.
Government competition is not fair competition. The government has a huge advantage, being in a position to both make the rules and administer a government- run option that would push other competitors out of the market.
— Start-up costs: A government- run health care plan would have distinct unfair advantages over private sector plans. The public health insurance option would be the beneficiary of $2 billion in start-up funds and 90 days’ work of premiums as reserves, courtesy of the U.S. Treasury.
Though the bill requires that the government option be selffinanced through premiums, it would have the implicit backing of the federal government — one that taxpayers are all too familiar with given recent experiences with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, whose “implicit” government backing has cost taxpayers $85 billion.
Government sets the price:
Under the revamped bill, the secretary of Health and Human Services would “negotiate” reimbursement rates with doctors and hospitals — an open-ended statement, with no language to prohibit the secretary from imposing Medicare reimbursement levels.
The federal government would have unparalleled leverage in negotiations with health care providers. The Lewin Group estimates that the government- run plan would underpay health care providers, compensating them at 20 to 30 percent below what private health plans pay. The government-run option would artificially lower prices, shifting costs to those with private health insurance.
— Shift in cost: Health care providers would be forced to charge patients with private insurance more to offset expected losses. As private health insurance premiums rise (estimated to average $460 for every American), more Americans would be crowded out of private health insurance and into the government-run option.
The Lewin Group estimates that up to 114 million individuals could lose access to their current coverage and be forced into a government option, including 106 million of those who currently receive employerprovided health care.
— Less administrative costs:
Much of the public option’s administrative costs would be absorbed by taxpayers.
If the new health commissioner needs attorneys, it could look to the Department of Justice. If the program needs office space, it could use— free of charge — one of the many federally owned buildings in Washington, D.C. The new government-run health insurance exchange would employ thousands of new bureaucrats, all of whom would receive health care coverage, retirement benefits and other benefits courtesy of the taxpayers. The new health exchange, as a government agency, would not have to pay income taxes or property taxes.
— Unfair competition: The government cannot be a fair competitor in a free market where it makes the rules.
Earlier this year, Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman subpoenaed health insurance executives and required that they turn over financial records, salary records and travel details. Nothing prevents the chairman from requiring that actuarial data from health insurance companies be disclosed so that the government could undercut their pricing.
Furthermore, the government option would not be subject to the federal and state antitrust laws as private health insurance companies would be.
On Aug. 9, Rep. Jan Schakowsky, D-Ill., was quoted in the Washington Examiner as saying, “A public option will put the private insurance industry out of business and lead to single- payer.” On April 18, during a forum on health care reform, she said, “Those of us who are pushing for a public health insurance option don’t disagree with the goal. This is not a principled fight. This is a fight about strategy for getting there, and I believe we will.”
I predict that if a government- run option became law, a complete government takeover of health care would occur within 10 years of enactment. I am firmly opposed to a governmentrun public option and will continue to advocate for a comprehensive free-market approach to reform that drives down cost and increases access.
Floor Speech on Speaker Pelosi's Government Takeover of Health Care
Saturday, November 7, 2009
Madame Speaker, we all agree that rising health insurance premiums are placing a heavy burden on many American families. Improving access to affordable health care and reducing its cost is important. But this plan to turn America’s health care over to a massive and costly government bureaucracy is just flat wrong.
It is also outrageous that no Republicans were allowed to participate in the writing of this bill, creating a liberal echo chamber bent on expanding government, raising taxes, and killing jobs. The President and the Majority in this House have said that you can ‘keep what you have, if you like it.’ But in reality this is a simple government takeover of health care and ‘keeping what you have’ will cost Americans more for health care. I have concluded that this legislation is the pathway to a single payer, national government run health plan. I've spoken with businesses in my own district who say that providing health insurance comprises 15 to 20 percent of their costs – so an 8 percent payroll tax is something they will gladly accept. They will then eliminate their current employee health plans and push employees onto the new government health exchange to bear the cost of purchasing their own health care. Seniors will lose the most as Medicare suffers draconian cuts that are Orwellianly called “savings.” The popular Medicare Advantage program is also cut as the bill lowers payments to traditional Medicare levels, thus reducing health care benefits to seniors, and even gives federal bureaucrats the power to eliminate the program by rejecting plan bids to provide Medicare Advantage coverage. This bill also creates a huge unfunded mandate on the states by raising the level of Medicaid coverage to individuals up to 150 percent of the Federal Poverty Level ($33,075 for a family of four). Nebraska taxpayers will be asked to pay for this expanded health care for years to come. Madame Speaker, I am deeply concerned by the bill's $1.3 trillion cost, cuts to important services in the name of 'savings' and the intrusion of government into the health care system. I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to vote “no” on this disastrous piece of legislation.
Floor Speeches on Speaker Pelosi's Trillion Dollar Government Takeover of Health Care
Friday, November 6, 2009
Congressman Terry's Floor Speech on Speaker Nancy Pelosi's Government Takeover Health Care Bill
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Letter to the Editor in the Omaha World Herald
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Terry plan covers health care
An Oct. 31 letter about U.S. Rep. Lee Terry, R-Neb., couldn’t be more wrong.
Rep. Terry has introduced H.R. 3937 — the Simple Universal Health Care Act of 2009. Terry’s plan attacks both access and cost of health care.
Make no mistake, Terry delivers. His continual honest and common-sense approach to big government is exactly what Nebraskans want.
Sherry Wood, Papillion
Congressman Terry on Mid American Money - November 2009
Mid American Money - November 2009 from Creighton College of Business on Vimeo.
The Worst Bill Ever
Monday, November 2, 2009
Epic new spending and taxes, pricier insurance, rationed care, dishonest accounting: The Pelosi health bill has it all.
To read the entire article...
Speaker Pelosi Introduces Government Takeover of Healthcare
Friday, October 30, 2009
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has introduced another version of government run health care. This bill, 'Affordable Health Care for America Act', H.R. 3962 is nearly 2,000 pages long and includes billions of dollars in tax increases. A summary of H.R. 3962 is available by clicking here: H.R. 3962 Summary. Here are the top ten tax increases:
1. SMALL BUSINESS SURTAX (Sec. 551, p. 336).....$460.5 BILLION
2. EMPLOYER MANDATE TAX (Secs. 511-512, p. 308).....$135.0 BILLION
3. INDIVIDUAL MANDATE TAX (Sec. 501, p. 296).....$33.0 BILLION
4. MEDICAL DEVICE TAX (Sec. 552, p. 339).....$20.0 BILLION
5. $2,500 ANNUAL CAP ON FSAs (Sec. 532, p. 325).....$13.3 BILLION
6. PROHIBITION ON PRE-TAX PURCHASES OF OVER-THE-COUNTER DRUGS THROUGH HSAs, FSAs, AND HRAs (Sec. 531, p. 324).....$5.0 BILLION
7. TAX ON HEALTH INSURANCE POLICIES TO FUND COMPARATIVE EFECTIVENESS RESEARCH TRUST FUND (Sec. 1802, p. 1162).....$2.0 BILLION
8. 20% PENALTY ON CERTAIN HSA DISTRIBUTIONS (Sec. 533, p. 326).....$1.3 BILLION
9. OTHER TAX HIKES AND INCREASED COMPLIANCE COSTS ON U.S. JOB CREATORS.....$56.4 BILLION
IRS reporting on payments to certain businesses (Sec. 553, p.344)...$17.1 BILLION
Delay implementation of worldwide interest allocation rules (Sec. 554, p. 345)...$26.1 BILLION
Override U.S. treaties on certain payments by "insourcing" businesses (Sec. 561, p. 346)...$7.5 BILLION
Codify economic substance doctrine and impose penalties (Sec. 562, p. 349)...$5.7 BILLION
10. OTHER REVENUE-RAISING PROVISIONS.....$3.0 BILLION
TOTAL TAX INCREASES....$729.5 BILLION
(Courtesy of the House Committee on Ways & Means Republicans)
Congressman Terry Introduces Healthcare Legislation
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
WASHINGTON- Today Congressman Lee Terry introduced landmark legislation to overhaul America’s healthcare system. Representative Terry’s simple and affordable plan for healthcare reform, the ‘Simple Universal Healthcare (SUH) Act of 2009’, H.R. 3937 creates a new health insurance program similar to the Federal Health Benefits Plan (FEHBP) now available to the President, Vice President, Members of Congress and federal government employees.
“Access and cost are the two major problems with health care today,” said Congressman Terry. “The rising cost of health insurance is preventing many people from getting the care they need. My plan tackles both these issues because it offers coverage to everyone and allows the marketplace to drive down costs. My constituents tell me they don’t want a public option so I have a common-sense plan to give the uninsured more choices with limited government involvement. Most important it won’t break the bank to get it done.”
Congressman Terry’s plan:
Ø Requires a minimum level of preventative benefits such as vaccines for both children and adults, annual physicals, cancer screenings (including mammograms for women), and mental health parity.
Ø Removes restrictions on pre-existing conditions for those enrolling: 1) within the program’s first year, or 2) during a 3-month period after the individual becomes eligible for the program.
Ø Require that individuals eligible for the program must be citizens or lawfully admitted to the U.S. for permanent resident; verification eligibility for program will be required, and individuals already covered by FEHBP, SCHIP, Medicaid, or Tricare are not eligible for this new program.
Ø Allow employers to enroll an employee or employees in the program within a three-month sign-up period.
Ø No new taxes or cuts in existing federal health benefits programs (e.g. Medicare or Medicaid) are included.
Ø The administrative costs will be the same as those to administer the FEHBP, which is now just $15 million a year.
Congressman Terry's Floor Statement on the Simple Universal Healthcare (SUH) Act of 2009
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Cost To Create One Stimulus Job: $71,500
CNN Senior Writer Tami Lubhy
Thursday, October 15, 2009
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com)--- The White House unveiled Thursday the first hard data on how many jobs the $787 billion recovery act has created.
To read the entire article...
The Baucus Bill is a Tax Bill
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
Remember when health-care reform was supposed to make life better for the middle class? That dream began to unravel this past summer when Congress proposed a bill that failed to include any competition-based reforms that would actually bend the curve of health-care costs. It fell apart completely when Democrats began papering over the gaping holes their plan would rip in the federal budget.
To read the entire article...
Congressman Terry's Opening Statement for the Energy and Commerce Committee Health Markup of H.R. 3200
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
45% of Doctors Would Consider Quitting If Congress Passes Health Care Overhaul
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
Two of every three practicing physicians oppose the medical overhaul plan under consideration in Washington, and hundreds of thousands would think about shutting down their practices or retiring early if it were adopted, a new IBD/TIPP Poll has found.
To read the entire article...
A message about ACORN funding
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
Time and time again the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) has proven to be a shady organization that cannot be trusted. Several ACORN employees have been arrested for voter fraud and authorities in several states have found that ACORN employees have falsified dozens of voter registration forms. Recently a disturbing video has come to light, which shows ACORN employees encouraging individuals to commit illegal activities like tax evasion and fraud. This is disgraceful. What is even worse is that this organization has received millions of dollars from the federal government. It is time to end taxpayer money from going to this corrupt organization.I have signed on to support the 'Defund ACORN Act'. This legislation would terminate all federal funding to ACORN. I am confident this bill will receive support from both Democrats and Republicans. It is clear ACORN has taken federal dollars and used them extremely unwisely and we must stop funding to this organization immediately.
To read the letter I signed asking President Barack Obama to use his authority to end all funding to and break all government ties with ACORN...
Appearance on MSNBC Weekend Dayside
Saturday, September 12, 2009
Posted Thursday, September 10, 2009
The Associated Press says President Obama used "iffy math" on his promise to pass healthcare legislation without raising the deficit
President Barack Obama used only-in-Washington accounting Wednesday when he promised to overhaul the nation's health care system without adding “one dime” to the deficit. By conventional arithmetic, Democratic plans would drive up the deficit by billions of dollars.The president's speech to Congress contained a variety of oversimplifications and omissions in laying out what he wants to do about health insurance. To read the entire article...
Posted Tuesday, September 2, 2009
Congressional Budget Office analysis of Medicare Prescription drug costs under H.R. 3200
To read a summary of the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office analysis of the cost of Medicare prescription drug premiumus for seniors...
................................................................................................
Coffee with Lee August 29, 2009
Coffee with Lee August 29, 2009 Part II
Congressman Terry participates in the Senate Doctors Show:
Appearance on the Fox News Program 'America's News Headquarters'
Saturday, August 22, 2009
Congressman Lee Terry Testifies at Senate Field Hearing about the Omaha VA Hospital
Appearance on the Fox News Program 'Red Eye'
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
Appearance on Cavuto
Friday, August 7, 2009
ProLife Update from Congressman Lee Terry
Friday, July 31, 2009
I am working on the Obama health care bill in my Energy and Commerce Committee as I write this message to you.
I note from news reports this morning that much confusion exists about the health care bill and whether it will cover abortion. After several amendments last night, the simple answer is clearly YES it will!
The bill creates a new federal health insurance exchange where all health insurance plans, before they can sell to someone, must comply to all rules and regulations mandated by the newly created Health Choices Commission. An amendment PASSED last night (Capps D-CA) that mandates at least one insurance plan cover abortion, and that HHS Secretary Sebelius determines if abortion must be covered by the government run "public" option. The Secretary staunchly favors abortion rights as does the President who chose her. Obviously, the government run option will cover elective abortion.
After the Capps amendment passed. Bart Stupak (D-Mi) and Joe Pitts (R-PA) and myself offered an amendment to ban abortion in these plans and ban any federal tax dollars from paying any cost of an abortion. After much debate many democrats including Bart Gordon (D-TN) joined with every Republican and the amendment actually passed by 1 vote. Hurray! It was a fantastic pro life victory!
But...Chairman Waxman, who is very pro-abortion, pulled a procedural maneuver later in the night and brought the Stupak-Pitts amendment back for reconsideration and the committee re-voted the amendment and this time the amendment LOST! Bart Gordon changed his vote from his previous "yes" to a "no". I've never seen such a thing before!
So, the bottom line in the bill, for now, is that the insurance exchange can mandate abortion coverage in both private insurance plans and the single government run plan.
I can assure you we will keep fighting for life through out the day!
One piece of good news for life is that the Stupak-Terry (me) conscience clause PASSED protecting doctors/nurses who believe in life, from being forced against their conscience, from having to perform or assist with an abortion. This was critical to our many religious- based hospital and clinics.
......................................................................................................
Posted Monday, July 20, 2009
Health Care Reform
To read a summary of America’s Affordable Health Choices of 2009, H.R. 3200,...
......................................................................................................
Posted Thursday, July 16, 2009
It's Not An Option
<http://www.ibdeditorials.com/default.aspx>
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY
Congress: It didn't take long to run into an "uh-oh" moment when reading the House's "health care for all Americans" bill. Right there on Page 16 is a provision making individual private medical insurance illegal.
When we first saw the paragraph Tuesday, just after the 1,018-page document was released, we thought we surely must be misreading it. So we sought help from the House Ways and Means Committee.
It turns out we were right: The provision would indeed outlaw individual private coverage. Under the Orwellian header of "Protecting The Choice To Keep Current Coverage," the "Limitation On New Enrollment" section of the bill clearly states:
Click Here to Read Full Article
......................................................................................................
Tuesday, July 7, 2009
"Of NICE and Men" (The Wall Street Journal Editorial Board)
Page A14 of the Wall Street Journal
Speaking to the American Medical Association last month, President Obama waxed enthusiastic about countries that "spend less" than the U.S. on health care. He's right that many countries do, but what he doesn't want to explain is how they ration care to do it.
Take the United Kingdom, which is often praised for spending as little as half as much per capita on health care as the U.S. Credit for this cost containment goes in large part to the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, or NICE. Americans should understand how NICE works because under ObamaCare it will eventually be coming to a hospital near you.
Click Here to Read Full Article
......................................................................................................
Thursday, July 2, 2009
H.R. 2454, American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009
......................................................................................................
Friday, June 26, 2009
Congressman Terry speaks on the House floor about the devastating impact of cap and trade:
......................................................................................................
......................................................................................................
Skyrocketing health care costs have increased the number of uninsured Americans and it is imperative that we address both access and rising costs. Instead of helping the millions in need, Speaker Pelosi wrote the Affordable Health Care for America Act, HR 3962, which will affect all insurance. Reform is needed but this is not the correct path for our country. It is also very disappointing that this bill was written by a handful of people, behind closed doors and passed late on a Saturday (Nov. 7th)night 220-215.
I worry that the Pelosi bill grants too much power to the government over health care and I fear that bureaucrats you can’t talk to will make decision on your health care, not you and your doctor.
Speaker Pelosi’s dream health care bill carries a price tag of $1.502 trillion over ten years, a figure comprised of the cost of expanding coverage ($1.055 trillion), establishing a high risk pool and retirement trust fund ($217 billion) and the Medicare Physician Payment ($229 billion). Less than 1 percent of the bill’s cost is spent in the first three years of the program. The ten year projected cost from the time the program truly goes into effect (2014) is $3.036 trillion. Cost projections for 2020-2029 – a staggering $4.807 trillion. Most of the tab is to be paid by new taxes on small business, individuals, medical goods and $500 billion will be shifted from Medicare. The rest goes to the national debt. I don’t think we can afford this plan and it will, in time, hurt our economy.
The business owners I have talked to say that providing health insurance comprises 12 to 15 percent of their costs, so an 8 percent payroll tax is something they will gladly accept. They will then eliminate their current employee health plans and push employees onto the new government health exchange where a government bureaucrat will steer themto the government run plan. The bill also creates a huge unfunded mandate on the states by raising the level of Medicaid coverage to individuals up to 150 percent of the Federal Poverty Level. This will cost Nebraska, which is already struggling, as much as $100 million.
I offered two amendments to Speaker Pelosi’s bill. The first was my alternative plan called Simple Universal Healthcare (SUH) which creates a new health insurance program similar to the Federal Employee Health Benefits Plan now available to the President, Vice President, Members of Congress and all federal government employees. The plan allows the uninsured and small businesses access to more affordable insurance with options, portability and no mandates.
The other amendment I offered would force the President, Vice President, and Members of Congress into the Pelosi public plan. Both amendments were prevented from a floor vote by Speaker Pelosi’s rules.
Speaker Pelosi allowed only one amendment offered by Congressman Stupak (D-MI), Congressman Ellsworth (D-IN) and Congressman Pitts (R-PA) that would prevent the use of tax dollars to be used directly or indirectly for abortion services, except in cases of rape, incest, or health of the mother, which I support since nothing is more important than life.
This amendment was allowed to come to the floor only as a deal to secure enough votes to pass the bill. The “deal” was simply to allow the amendment as no other assurances were made. I have concerns whether or not this language will stay in the bill or be in the Senate version of the legislation. In fact House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-SC) believes the amendment will be removed.
Now that the Democratic health care bill has passed the House it is time to focus the attention on the Senate. To date, there is no final version of a Senate health care bill. It has been reported that the Senate bill will cost close to a trillion dollars and will be paid for by placing fees on insurance companies, drug companies and medical device makers. The Senate plan also includes cuts to Medicare and Medicaid and fines for people who do not purchase health care insurance and Senator Reid’s version of a public, government run plan. I am opposed to a government takeover of our health care system and I will continue to be a strong advocate of putting patients first, for a comprehensive free-market approach to reform that drives down the long term costs of health care and increases access.
“As a fiscal conservative President Obama has my full support to hold the line on spending and reduce our ever-increasing national deficit. I also agree with President Obama that we must create jobs and job growth for small businesses—that is key to getting our economy back on track. At the same time I am deeply concerned with the trillions of dollars that will be added to the national debt over the next several years. And the amount of taxes increases, especially in the last year is mind-boggling.”
“I sincerely hope that President Obama’s message is not just political rhetoric and these promises are backed up with actions. When Speaker Nancy Pelosi walks out of a secret, closed-door meeting and says we are a transparent administration, words do not match actions.”
“I am committed to working with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to find fiscally sound ways to get our economy back on track, bring meaningful reform to health care and stop the wasteful government spending which has become the norm in Washington.”
Friday, June 26, 2009
Congressman Terry made the following statement on the House floor today regarding the cap and tax bill:
Madame Speaker:
While there is still vigorous debate over the amount of the human contribution to global warming, it seems clear that man has played a role. I believe that we have a moral obligation to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions and use clean, reliable, affordable sources of energy. But we must balance this moral obligation with an equal obligation we have to our constituents to do this in a manner that preserves our nation’s economic competitiveness and jobs for Americans.
The Cap and Tax bill before us today is exactly that — an attempt to collect more money from Americans through indirect taxation; it is not a serious attempt to reduce carbon dioxide or other GHG emissions. The basic message of Cap and Tax bill is that "you can still emit CO2 as long as long as you pay the government for this privilege." This would be called extortion under other circumstances. Tony Soprano would be proud.
Other means of reducing emissions, such as phasing out older, dirtier, less efficient coal plants and replacing them in an orderly manner with clean, reliable, affordable energy like nuclear power were dismissed by the Democrat Leadership without even cursory consideration. However, this approach would produce more jobs than the Cap and Tax bill, and result in significant CO2 reductions without the significant increase in costs to consumers’ utility bills this bill creates.
Advocates of the Cap and Tax bill state that it will not significantly increase the economic burdens on our constituents. This is just not true. The Cap and Tax bill also contains a Renewable Electricity Standard and other elements which will significantly increase costs to utilities and consumers. The Omaha Public Power District in my District conducted an independent analysis of the costs to my constituents, free of political interference like the one put out by EPA. Even with the free allowances allocated under the Waxman-Markey Cap and Tax bill, costs for Nebraskans will increase by $74 million in 2012, and increase to $410 million a year by 2030 in the most optimistic case. My constituents will pay a new energy tax every time they flip on a light switch, turn on their computers, or charge their cell phones.
When the Energy & Commerce Committee met, amendments to replace old coal plants with clean, reliable, affordable energy from nuclear plants, or to encourage the construction of more nuclear plants to reduce our carbon emissions, were rejected on mostly party lines. This makes no sense. Nuclear power is clean, reliable, and the cheapest means of producing electricity in history to date. I urge my colleagues to reject this costly, job-killing legislation.
......................................................................................................
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
In a CNBC interview economic guru Warren Buffett criticized Speaker Nancy Pelosi's plan for a new energy tax, watch the interview here:
......................................................................................................
Thursday, June 18, 2009
Conference Call with Nebraska Farm Bureau on Cap and Trade
Click here to listen > (MP3 format).
Monday, June 15, 2009
The American Energy Act
An "All-of-the-Above" Solution for Energy Independence
Increase production of American-made energy in an environmentally-sound manner.
• Promote new, clean and renewable sources of energy such as nuclear, clean-coal-technology, wind and solar energy.
• Encourage greater efficiency and conservation by extending tax incentives for energy efficiency and rewarding development of greater conservation techniques and new energy sources.
• Cut red-tape and reduce frivolous litigation.
The American Energy Act is an "all-of-the-above" solution that offers more affordable energy, more well-paying jobs, energy independence, and a cleaner environment.
Read more by downloading the full article here > (pdf).
......................................................................................................
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
Omaha World Herald Op-Ed Article:
"Cap-and-trade would mean bigger bills for OOPD ratepayers"
by Gary Gates and Fred Ulrich
The Omaha Public Power District's customer-owners are faced with the prospect that federal legislation would undo much of the public power advantage they've enjoyed for more than six decades.
Read more by downloading the full article here > (pdf).
Download the OPPD Cost Impact Report here > (pdf).
......................................................................................................
Published Monday June 8, 2009
A hefty price to go green
BY JOSEPH MORTON • WORLD-HERALD BUREAU
WASHINGTON - Sure, you want to save the planet, but how much do you want to pay for it?
Local electric utilities say environmental legislation moving through Congress carries a potentially hefty price tag, with rates projected to rise about 25 percent in 2012 just from one aspect of the proposal. And Midwesterners could be especially hard hit, they say.
"It's undeniable the cost will be significant," said David Sokol, chairman of Iowa-based MidAmerican Energy Holdings Co.
Read full article here > (pdf).
RELATED MEDIA: David Sokol, Chairman of the Board for MidAmerican Energy Holdings Company reads his opening statement at an Energy and Commerce subcommittee hearing on cap and trade:
RELATED MEDIA: Chairman of the Board for MidAmerican Holdings Corporation David Sokol recently testified on Capitol Hill against cap and trade:
......................................................................................................
Friday, June 5, 2009
The U.S. House Energy and Commerce Committee, of which I am a member of, unfortunately passed a cap and trade proposal put forth by Representatives Henry Waxman and Ed Markey. Their proposal is nothing more than a new energy tax that will hit you and businesses hard. Every time you flip on a light switch, fill up your gas tank you will suffer. Farmers will be especially impacted by this proposal. With little or no input from you this bill is making its way through Congressional committees and will likely be on the House floor in the coming weeks.
I would like to share with you what one of my colleagues, Representative Frank Lucas of Oklahoma had to say about the impact of cap and trade on agriculture.
"Those who will be hit the hardest will be people living in rural areas. Unlike Chairman Waxman's Hollywood constituents, rural Americans have different lifestyles and challenges. They must travel farther for routine errands—25 percent more miles than urban households according to the most recent Federal Highway data. And, rural households spend 58% more on fuel than urban residents as a percentage of their income. Power providers in rural America face a unique challenge of providing affordable electricity to larger, less densely populated areas. Rural Electric Cooperatives serve 40 million Americans averaging around seven consumers per mile, while other utilities average 35 customers per mile."
He's exactly right. Agriculture feeds our nation and to impose this new tax on our Agriculture industry is irresponsible and unconscionable. Many farm groups have come out against this new and devastating tax. I recently participated in a conference call with national bloggers to talk about this reckless cap and trade proposal. Listen to the call here:
......................................................................................................
Friday, June 5, 2009
The U.S. House Energy and Commerce Committee, of which I am a member of, unfortunately passed a cap and trade proposal put forth by Representatives Henry Waxman and Ed Markey. Their proposal is nothing more than a new energy tax that will hit you and businesses hard. Every time you flip on a light switch, fill up your gas tank you will suffer. Farmers will be especially impacted by this proposal. With little or no input from you this bill is making its way through Congressional committees and will likely be on the House floor in the coming weeks.
I would like to share with you what one of my colleagues, Representative Frank Lucas of Oklahoma had to say about the impact of cap and trade on agriculture.
"Those who will be hit the hardest will be people living in rural areas. Unlike Chairman Waxman's Hollywood constituents, rural Americans have different lifestyles and challenges. They must travel farther for routine errands—25 percent more miles than urban households according to the most recent Federal Highway data. And, rural households spend 58% more on fuel than urban residents as a percentage of their income. Power providers in rural America face a unique challenge of providing affordable electricity to larger, less densely populated areas. Rural Electric Cooperatives serve 40 million Americans averaging around seven consumers per mile, while other utilities average 35 customers per mile."
He's exactly right. Agriculture feeds our nation and to impose this new tax on our Agriculture industry is irresponsible and unconscionable. Many farm groups have come out against this new and devastating tax. I recently participated in a conference call with national bloggers to talk about this reckless cap and trade proposal. Listen to the call here:
......................................................................................................
Monday, May 18, 2009
CAP AND TRADE
This week the Energy and Commerce Committee will be discussing a cap and trade proposal put forth by Representatives Henry Waxman and Ed Markey. We can all agree we need to find cleaner sources of energy, but this cap and trade plan is nothing more than a new energy tax that will be devastating to you and our already brittle economy.
To sum it up this bill will punish businesses who don't meet extreme and unreasonable CO2 emission standards by taking their capital to pay the government. This will be fatal to our economy because in essence businesses will see their electric bill double which will be devastating to a manufacturers and businesses who use fossil fuels. Most companies won't be able to survive and many will chose to move to other countries. Now we've lost businesses and millions of jobs to boot.
Companies will also have no choice but to pass on this new and crushing tax to you. Every time you turn on a light switch, cook dinner or fill up your tank you'll be impacted by this cap and trade proposal. The Heritage Foundation estimates by 2035 the impact of the Waxman-Markey proposal will be:
•Reduce aggregate gross domestic product (GDP) by $7.4 trillion
•Destroy 844,000 jobs on average, with peak years seeing unemployment rise by over 1,900,000 jobs
•Raise electricity rates 90 percent after adjusting for inflation
•Raise inflation-adjusted gasoline prices by 74 percent
•Raise residential natural gas prices by 55 percent
•Raise an average family's annual energy bill by $1,500
•Increase inflation-adjusted federal debt by 29 percent, or $33,400 additional federal debt per person, again after adjusting for inflation
Let's not drive our economy off a cliff by instituting a new and catastrophic tax just to reduce 1 percent of CO2 emission globally. If you have any questions about this proposal don't hesitate to contact my office at: 402-397-9944
Audio Clip 01: Lee Tery interview (Salem Radio Network News) - .wav format
Audio Clip 02: Lee Tery interview (Salem Radio Network News) - .wav format
......................................................................................................
A CHART IS WORTH A THOUSAND WORDS...
Click on the chart below
Tuesday, May 5, 2009
CAP AND TRADE HEARINGS
Energy and Commerce Democrats are meeting with President Obama (no Republicans allowed) to mend the division between them on the Waxman-Pelosi-Markey draft. There are two distinct camps: the more moderate Blue dogs known as the Boucher-Dingel camp and the liberal Camp of Waxman-Markey who staunchly support cap and tax and nothing else. So which side will have their arms twisted into submission? I doubt the President is calling the Democratic committee members to his office to make chairman Waxman, Mr. Markey and Speaker Pelosi to move.
At the same time, the task force that will draft a viable alternative that I'm a member of is holding an open hearing with television cameras, reporters and bloggers. Witness like Gov. Engler who heads the National Association of Manufacturers who testified that industry uses 34% of electricity and has 12.3 million jobs at stake. Their estimate is that industry electrical rates would rise 142%! Natural gas prices rise 180%. That would cost industry jobs, estimated around 4 million.
Witnesses state that common sense leads one to conclude that high increases in energy costs will decrease competitiveness of U.S. Industry, so many will close or move out of the U.S.
Ms. Jaeger, a public health expert, states the debate on cap & trade should focus on the balance of public health and cost to people. She mentions that if the Waxman plan is adopted it would result in negligible reduction of CO2 with no realized public health benefits. Keep in mind other countries will add more CO2 in the next generation than U.S. would reduce during the same time. But every one agrees that everyone, every family, every business will pay a lot more for their electricity and gas.
Dr. Calzada from Spain informs that the creation of green jobs in his country is half of what traditional energy jobs were lost. That 90% of the green jobs are installation and temporary, 10% are permanent. He suggests that is why Spain has the highest unemployment in the European Union at almost 17%
Media