Ruben Kihuen’s statement on Hardy’s 6th vote to repeal ACA and 5th vote to defund Planned Parenthood

KihuenHdr

For Immediate Release
Janurary 6th, 2015
Contact: Dave Chase, (702) 350-2744

— Ruben Kihuen, State Senator and candidate for U.S. Congress (NV-04), released the following statement after Congressman Cresent Hardy voted for the 6th time to repeal the Affordabl Card Act and the 5th time to defund Planned Parenthood:

Kihuen said:
“Congressman Hardy and Congressional Republicans should be ashamed of their obsession with taking this country’s health care system backwards and attacking women’s health care. Americans deserve better.”

Background

2016: HR 3762, Vote#6 — Today, Rep. Hardy (CD4), along with Representatives Mark Amodei (CD2) and Joe Heck (CD3) voted to effectively gut the Affordable Care Act by repealing/defunding the bulk of provisions of this bill as well as prohibiting any/all funding for Planned Parenthood

2015: Hardy Voted Five Times To Defund Planned Parenthood. In 2015, Hardy voted five times to attempt to defund Planned Parenthood, in part or whole. [HR 3134, Vote #504, 9/18/15; Democratic Leader – Motions To Recommit, 9/18/15; HR 3134, Vote #505, 9/18/15; Washington Post, 9/18/15; HR 3495,Vote #524, 9/29/15; Duffy Press Release, 9/29/15; H Con Res 79, Vote #527, 9/30/15; CQ Floor Votes, 9/30/15; HR 3762, Vote #568, 10/23/15; Fox News,10/23/15]

Hardy Voted To Create Panel To Investigate Planned Parenthood. In October 2015, Hardy voted “to create a special committee to investigate Planned Parenthood and the handling of aborted fetal tissue, all but ensuring an already-fierce partisan battle will continue into 2016. In a nearly party-line vote, lawmakers voted 242 to 184 to establish a 13-member committee with broad power to investigate wrongdoing by Planned Parenthood amid allegations that it has tried to profit from the sale of aborted tissue.” [H Res 461, Vote #538, 10/07/15; The Hill, 10/07/15]

Hardy Voted To Repeal Or Dismantle The Affordable Care Act Six Times. In 2015, Hardy voted to repeal or dismantle the Affordable Care Act, in part or whole, six times. [HR 40, Vote #141/08/15; HR 596, Vote #582/03/15; S Con Res 11, Vote #1834/30/15; HR 160, Vote # 3756/18/15; HR 1190, Vote #376,6/23/15; HR 3762, Vote #56810/23/15]

Voted To Implement Nevada State Health Exchange. Hardy voted in favor of a bill that “creates the Silver State Health Insurance Exchange to provide services relating to the purchase and sale of health insurance by residents and certain employers in this State …, [which] is required to create and administer a state-based health insurance exchange, facilitate the purchase and sale of qualified health plans, provide for the establishment of a program to help certain small employers in Nevada in facilitating the enrollment of employees in qualified health plans, and perform all other duties that are required of it pursuant to the federal Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, the federal Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 and any amendments to or regulations or guidance issued pursuant to those acts” The bill passed 38-0. [SB440, 6/04/11; Las Vegas Review-Journal, 8/08/14]

Cited Nevada Health Link As Example Of Bipartisanship. In September 2014, the Desert Valley Times wrote, “Hardy touted his bipartisan work in getting legislation passed, which will allow him to go straight to Congress and get things done and he vowed to continue to do that. Hardy cited his vote for the state-run Nevada Health Link, the exchange for the health reform law, as an example. He said he voted for it to keep it as much in the state’s hands as possible and keep the federal government out of it. ‘Unfortunately it hasn’t worked out,’ he said.” [Desert Valley Times, 9/25/14]


State Senator Ruben Kihuen is running as a Democrat in Nevada’s 4th Congressional District. Ruben has a proven record of real results for working families. Born in Mexico, Ruben and his family immigrated to the United States in search of a better life. He worked his way through college and after graduation was inspired to “pay it forward” by working with other students at College of Southern Nevada. In the legislature, Ruben helped craft landmark bi-partisan bills increasing funding for our schools and making college more affordable, and he beat back a reckless Republican agenda attempting to dismantle worker’s rights, restrict women’s health care and repeal LGBTQ protections. Ruben is running for Congress to ensure everyone has a fair shot at the American Dream.

To Learn more about Ruben Kihuen and his campaign for Congress, visit www.rubenforcongress.com or follow Ruben on Facebook or Twitter.

Playing Doctor with Americans’ Lives

3Doctors400Republicans, in both the House and the Senate, are currently colluding to gut Healthcare Reform and deny actual healthcare to millions of women across our nation using a process called Reconciliation.  Reconciliation is an expedited budgetary process that offers some procedural advantages: it needs only the support of a simple majority in the Senate, and cannot be filibustered. The bill they intend pass via reconciliation is HR3762, inappropriately named, “Restoring Americans’ Healthcare Freedom Reconciliation Act” … it should be named “Butchering All Hope of Being Able to Afford Effective Healthcare Act.”

This reconciliation bill includes language to repeal key parts of Obamacare: the individual mandate, the employer mandate, the medical device tax and the ‘Cadillac tax.’ There are press posts saying that it will also end the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB), but I can’t find such a provision in the bill.In addition, it would defund Planned Parenthood for one year

Defunding Planned Parenthood for a Year—

Here’s the section which specifically codifies the vilification of Planned Parenthood as a “Prohibited Entity” that just happens to provide “essential” healthcare for millions of women across our nation:

SEC. 202. FEDERAL PAYMENT TO STATES.
(a) In General.—Notwithstanding section 504(a), 1902(a)(23), 2002, 2005(a)(4), 2102(a)(7), or 2105(a)(1) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 704(a), 1396b(a)(23), 1397a, 1397d(a)(4), 1397bb(a)(2), 1397ee(a)(1)), or the terms of any Medicaid waiver in effect on the date of enactment of this Act that is approved under section 1115 or 1915 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1315, 1396n), for the 1-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act no Federal funds may be made available to a State for payments to a prohibited entity, whether made directly to the prohibited entity or through a managed care organization under contract with the State.

(b) Definition Of Prohibited Entity.—In this section, the term “prohibited entity” means an entity, including its affiliates, subsidiaries, successors, and clinics—

(1) that, as of the date of enactment of this Act—

(A) is an organization described in section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and exempt from tax under section 501(a) of such Code;

(B) is an essential community provider described in section 156.235 of title 45, Code of Federal Regulations, that is primarily engaged in family planning services, reproductive health, and related medical care; and

(C) provides for abortions, other than an abortion—

(i) if the pregnancy is the result of an act of rape or incest; or

(ii) in the case where a woman suffers from a physical disorder, physical injury, or physical illness that would, as certified by a physician, place the woman in danger of death unless an abortion is performed, including a life-endangering physical condition caused by or arising from the pregnancy itself; and

(2) for which the total amount of Federal and State expenditures under the Medicaid program under title XIX of the Social Security Act in fiscal year 2014 made directly to the entity and to any affiliates, subsidiaries, successors, or clinics of the entity, or made to the entity and to any affiliates, subsidiaries, successors, or clinics of the entity as part of a nationwide health care provider network, exceeded $350,000,000.

[Emphasis mine]

Please note that the provisions to completely eliminate any funds for Planned Parenthood were proposed and recommended by the Ways and Means Committee currently led by Rep. Paul Ryan, that same Paul Ryan who will is expected to be elected as Speaker of the House next Wednesday — that is, unless the right wing extremists of the Republican Freedom Caucus renege and cast their votes for their beloved Rep. Daniel Webster instead.

Repealing the Individual and Employer Mandates —

Repealing individual mandate provisions are likely to increase, rather than decrease, the number of U.S. residents without health coverage, thus eliminating the progress that has been made in holding people responsible for their healthcare.  If the CBO forecasts are correct, the H.R. 3762 mandate repeal provisions could increase the number of uninsured U.S. residents by 55 percent to 65 percent. But, that’s okay with Republicans because for each person who doesn’t buy health insurance, the government doesn’t have to shell out $760-$815.  But they took it one step further.  To help their corporate benefactors, they also plan on repealing the mandates on employers to provide medical coverage.  Thus, ordinary Americans seeking to access affordable healthcare coverage for themselves and their families are going to rapidly find themselves up the proverbial creak, with no paddle, a leaky boat and no pail with which to bail out their boat.

The house voted on passage of HR3762 on Friday.  The vote was 240-189 with 5 Democrats not voting.  One Democrat (Peterson) voted for passage and ALL THREE of Nevada’s Congressional Republicans voted ‘AYE’ for passage! The bill is now off to the Senate, where it can be considered without a 60-vote cloture requirement (assuming the package passes muster with the Senate “Byrd Rule.”).

The Byrd Rule is a Senate rule that amends the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 to allow Senators, during the Reconciliation Process, to block a piece of legislation if it purports significantly to increase the federal deficit beyond a ten-year term or is otherwise an “extraneous matter” as set forth in the Budget Act.  It is named after West Virginia Senator Robert Byrd.

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) assessed the effects of HR3762 on long-term deficits and direct spending as follows:

  • Including macroeconomic feedback, CBO and JCT estimate that enacting the legislation would increase net direct spending as well as on-budget deficits by more than $5 billion in one or more of the four consecutive 10-year periods beginning in 2026.
  • Excluding macroeconomic feedback, CBO and JCT estimate that enacting the legislation would not increase net direct spending by more than $5 billion in either of the first two consecutive 10-year periods beginning in 2026; however, the agencies are not able to determine whether enacting the legislation would increase net direct spending by more than $5 billion in the third or fourth 10-year period.
  • Excluding macroeconomic feedback, CBO and JCT estimate that enacting the legislation would increase on-budget deficits by more than $5 billion in one or more of the four consecutive 10-year periods beginning in 2026.

And because enacting the legislation would affect direct spending and revenues, ‘pay-as-you-go procedures‘ apply.

The President is then expected to veto, setting up the need for a veto-override vote in Congress.  In a statement promising Obama’s veto, the White House said the GOP measure “would take away critical benefits and health care coverage from hard-working middle-class families.”

However, a conservative revolt could derail the bill’s progress, as some conservative groups are opposing because the bill leaves some parts of ObamaCare intact


Related Posts