Michael Burgess

The expectation is that in a single-payer, government-run system, where there is no--you just take--you know, you become a price-taker.

People don't take kindly to you changing their employer-sponsored health insurance.

Today we should be focusing on parts of health insurance--the insurance market that are working for Americans.

As a physician, I do not believe that the government should interfere or hinder a doctor's ability to act in the best interest of his or her patient.

We should look at ways to help our states put together the programs, and let it work on a more local level

I am the son of a physician, a physician who chose to leave Canada's government-run health care system behind for the United States.

But this plan will lead to a massive tax increase. It will eliminate private insurance. And it will accelerate the pending bankruptcy in the already dwindling Medicare Trust Fund.

Look, the Democrats' one-size-fits-all, government-run, single-payer health care bill would be an epic fail to provide access to quality health care for Americans.

We, the United States of America, the United States House of Representatives, is making that investment and bringing those things ever closer.

Single-payer is not one-size-fits-all, it is one-size-fits-no-one.

Quite simply, the success of the employer-sponsored insurance market is not worth wiping out with single-payer health care.

What good is health care insurance if you are afraid to use it because you cannot afford your copay or your deductible?

It is frustrating to see a measles resurgence nearly 20 years after measles was declared eliminated from the United States.

What these statistics show us is that the vaccination program was safe and effective.

So does it concern you, some of the statements we have heard about pushing to that type of system, particularly those that say we are going to void any private insurance?

Today we have been convened once again to discuss issues that will not improve the affordability of health insurance for Americans.

With 173 million people in the employer health insurance market that value their coverage, I think that would be very problematic.

But under the Affordable Care Act, I hear from constituents all the time that the plans are just not affordable in the Affordable Care Act.

These are real savings for patients in my State.

What works best for Oregon may not work best for California, Madam Chair.

We should understand that better. Perhaps a better use of our time would be spent discussing bipartisan solutions.

This hearing is another attempt to distract from the Democratic Party's agenda to establish Government-run, single-payer healthcare.

I welcome the fact that the administration has provided this flexibility.

What good is healthcare insurance if you are afraid to use it because you can't afford your deductible?

There is vast, bipartisan support for protecting coverage for individuals with preexisting conditions.