On the recordFebruary 7, 2024
I appreciate my colleague's support of the amendment. I will close with addressing the ``yes, but'' argument. Those who live with intellectual, physical, and developmental disabilities and those who love them are quite familiar with the ``yes, but'' argument. Yes, we care about you, but others face struggles, too. Yes, we want you to have access, but others may have obstacles, too. Yes, we care about your lives, but we care about others more. That is the basis of the argument against this bill, ``yes, but.'' My daughter has heard it every day of her life. I have experienced it every day. Yes, we hope to educate her, but we don't have time for it. Yes, we want to give you access to vaccines and care, but you are not our priority. Yes, during COVID we wanted to ensure every life was protected, but we didn't have the time to work it out for you. This bill is not perfect. The chairwoman doesn't expect it to be, nor do I. QALYs devalue the lives of Americans who have far too many obstacles in their place. My argument in response to the argument against this bill is ``yes, but.'' Yes, kids like mine deserve access to quality care; yes, those with disabilities deserve to have life-affirming services; and, yes, those with disabilities face far too many obstacles to living and pursuing a life of happiness; but we can take this one step. Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
