David Thomas: “Mr. Speaker, I am really pleased that the gentleman from California [Mr. Waxman] pretty well laid out the game plan…”

“Mr. Speaker, I am really pleased that the gentleman from California [Mr. Waxman] pretty well laid out the game plan here. He talked about the structural changes that the Republicans made in the balanced budget amendment in terms of Medicare changes. Most of those frankly are in this bill. They were voted on unanimously in subcommittee. The point that the gentleman was making on the structural age change from 65 to 67 was not in our program. It was not in the plan. If you are going to offer a motion to instruct which is not theater, the gentleman from California then went on to discuss the medical savings account provision and a number of other provisions. If you want a contest, you want to lock in positions that are important, that are of substance, that should have been your motion to instruct. Something of substance would have been worth this debate. The gentleman says we should have a recorded vote on the motion to instruct. The gentleman well knows the motion to instruct carries exactly the same weight whether it is passed by a voice vote or by a recorded vote. It is obvious in the debate that they want to make points not included in the motion to instruct. The motion to instruct is theater, and the recorded vote that will be insisted on by my colleagues on the other side of the aisle is theater as well. Welcome to the grand theater of the absurd.”