For the purpose of a unanimous consent request, I yield to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Green).

I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey).

Parliamentary inquiry. The Acting CHAIR. If the gentleman from Louisiana yields for the parliamentary inquiry it will come out of his time.

That information is incorrect. I would like to see a letter that pertains to this EPA action. I think it might have been a letter related to a different piece of legislation. I am now pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from…

My inquiry is: Must the debate be on the pending amendment or can the debate be on a broader bill?

I have a parliamentary inquiry. The Acting CHAIR. Does the gentleman from Louisiana yield to the gentleman from California for that purpose?

May I inquire as to how much time is remaining on each side? The CHAIR. The gentleman from California has 10 minutes remaining. The gentleman from Michigan has 11\1/2\ minutes remaining.

I still think there are states' rights and states' prerogatives, and this really tramples on all of that.

I think medical malpractice is a real problem. I don't think the system is a very good one.

I don't like some of these caps. Frankly it is such a low cap and hasn't been expanded.

Either this is April Fool's Day or the Republicans are trying to fool the House of Representatives and the country by attempting to pass this legislation. There is no truth in labeling whatsoever in H.R. 1255, the ``Government Shutdown…

Santa Monica Airport is a unique general aviation facility located in my congressional district. Each end of the bidirectional runway is abutted by steep hills, public streets, and densely populated neighborhoods, with homes as close as…

I have an amendment at the desk. The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment. The text of the amendment is as follows: Page 256, after line 9, insert the following (and conform the table of contents accordingly): SEC. 814…

No one in the Congress or the Administration tried to stop you from communicating your best judgments on the estimates for this health care bill.

I am not objecting to this witness testifying but we have Mr. Holtz-Eakin testifying.

The current Republican Majority is not serious about deficit reduction. They are about ideological stances that help the rich get richer.

In order to pay for this program, which has been a successful program, and it is a lifeline.

We need to have a standard that we all understand because some witnesses are required to give disclosures.

We are refusing to ask the people at the very top 1 percent to pay their fair share of taxes.

So we all agree that Medicare cost growth has been brought to be a very low level, so low that in CBO's baseline the triggers for the Independent Payment Advisory Board are not tripped anymore.

They choose to cut Medicare, Medicaid and health insurance for middle-income American families to pay for tax cuts for the rich.

If the chamber claims to represent small businesses, then why does it oppose health reform provisions that would prevent small businesses from facing these challenges?

I find this hearing to be sadly ironic. The Republican members of the House have frequently complained about the growth in spending in government health programs.

But nuclear energy, on the other hand, is not competitive unless the government subsidizes it.

The Republican energy policy seems to be depending on coal, oil, and nuclear power.