CONYERS Announced His Retirement From Congress

John Conyers announced his retirement from congress today.

He has endorsed his son, John Conyers, III to take over his seat.

Much more to come.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

CONYERS Floor Statement for H.R. 372, the “Competitive Health Insurance Reform Act of 2017"

Dean of the U.S, House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.

Although I rise in qualified support of H.R. 372, the “Competitive Health Insurance Reform Act of 2017,” I do not endorse the Majority’s exaggerated claims regarding the bill’s impact on the affordability and availability of health insurance.

H.R. 372 would partially repeal the limited Federal antitrust exemption for the business of insurance established by the McCarran-Ferguson Act in 1945. 

Specifically, the bill only permits Federal antitrust enforcement with regard to the business of health insurance.

House Democrats have long supported a full repeal of McCarran-Ferguson’s antitrust exemption for all insurers, not just for health insurers.

And, in 2010, under a Democratic House Majority, we passed legislation to repeal the McCarran-Ferguson exemption for health insurers by a vote of 406 to 19, even though House Republicans had not previously supported moving any version of a McCarran-Ferguson repeal bill.

But let me be clear.  Enacting H.R. 372 would in no way be a substitute for the many health insurance guarantees of the Affordable Care Act.

To begin with, enacting H.R. 372 would not significantly improve health care affordability or coverage.

According to the Congressional Budget Office, H.R. 372’s effect on health insurance premiums “would probably be quite small,” and enacting the bill will have “no significant net effect on the premiums that private insurers would charge for health or dental insurance.”

And, Consumers Union observes that the application of the antitrust laws to some health insurance activity, by itself, is simply not enough to create a vibrant insurance market because our “long experience shows you can’t expect a health care system to run effectively on competition alone.”

Likewise, the Majority’s claim that enacting H.R. 372 would create major new competition by allowing cross-state insurance sales is unavailing.

Current law, including the Affordable Care Act, already allows states to agree with each other to allow cross-state insurance sales.

Enabling Federal antitrust agencies to police certain forms of anticompetitive conduct will not, in and of itself, incentivize health insurers to offer products across state lines beyond the incentives that already exist for offering such products.

Whatever the incentives for health insurers to offer such products, they have little to do with Federal antitrust law or enforcement.

Finally, enacting H.R. 372 would not ensure that the Affordable Care Act’s prohibitions against discrimination and limits on premium growth would remain in place.

H.R. 372 only applies to certain anticompetitive conduct and does not preserve or enhance existing protections for consumers of health insurance.

For instance, it does not prohibit discrimination by health insurers on the basis of preexisting conditions.  Nor does it reduce premium growth or require health insurers to be accountable for price increases.

Repeal of the antitrust exemption for health insurance is a complement to, not a replacement for, the Affordable Care Act’s many consumer protections.

This is not an “either/or” situation.  We need H.R. 372 and the Affordable Care Act to be in place to maximize benefits, improve quality, and lower costs for consumers.

While I support the bill, I take issue with the Majority’s rhetoric.  It is important that we set the record straight here.

I reserve the balance of my time.

______________________________________

CLOSING REMARKS

In closing, I want to reiterate my support for H.R. 372. 

As I have already mentioned, House Democrats have long supported legislation to repeal the McCarran-Ferguson Act’s exemption for the business of insurance.

Repealing the antitrust exemption for health insurers, as H.R. 372 does, will make the Affordable Care Act even more effective.

I disagree, however, with the Majority’s attempt to use this legislation as a fig leaf for replacing the Affordable Care Act. 

Indeed, the same architects of the Majority’s “repeal and replace” effort—including Speaker Paul Ryan, Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price, and Ways and Means Committee Chairman Kevin Brady—voted against a substantively identical version of this bill in 2010. 

           

Let us not be fooled. I yield back.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

CONYERS Condemns Insulting Statement By Carson On Slavery

Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.

The concepts of “choice” and “agency” seem lost to some officials of the Trump administration.

First, it was Education Secretary Betsy DeVos’ insulting statement on Historically Black Colleges and Universities and now, the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, Dr. Ben Carson, epically fails to address the impact of slavery and discrimination on the history and lives of African-Americans.

Enslaved Africans did not choose to come to the Americas, they were brought here in chains against their will and once here, fought for freedom despite tremendous odds.

The failure of Trump administration officials to recognize and acknowledge these very real facts shows a profound ignorance and lack of respect for the Black American experience.

Ben Carson Refers to Slaves as ‘Immigrants’ in First Remarks to HUD Staff

“That’s what America is about, a land of dreams and opportunity,’’ he said. “There were other immigrants who came here in the bottom of slave ships, worked even longer, even harder for less. But they too had a dream that one day their sons, daughters, grandsons, granddaughters, great-grandsons, great-granddaughters, might pursue prosperity and happiness in this land.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/06/us/politics/ben-carson-refers-to-slaves-as-immigrants-in-first-remarks-to-hud-staff.html?_r=1

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

CONYERS & THOMPSON Condemn Reports Of Trump's Military Deportation Force

Washington, DC – House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI) and House Homeland Security Committee Ranking Member Bennie G. Thompson (D-MS), today released the following joint statement in response to reports that President Donald Trump’s Department of Homeland Security had plans to use the National Guard to round up and deport undocumented immigrants:

Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.

“This draft memo shows the depths that Donald Trump will go to implement his callous “deportation force” and instill panic and fear among immigrant families and communities throughout this nation.

“It is completely outrageous and disturbing that this document, generated from within the highest levels of this country’s government, would even contemplate using our military on our own soil to round up immigrants. Additionally, the memo outlines cruel and draconian changes to how this country would treat unaccompanied children and would force millions of others into detention with escalating costs.  This should be of concern to all Americans.  

“Whether or not the memo is implemented, it will undoubtedly lead to fear and intimidation in our communities, which are already reeling from Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s raids. We call on Secretary Kelly to immediately come forward and not only disavow this memo, but explain how it even came into existence.”

White House Denies It Weighed Using National Guard as Deportation Force

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration denied on Friday that it was considering using National Guard troops as a deportation force to round up undocumented immigrants, rebutting a report by The Associated Press that cited an 11-page memorandum describing such an effort.

A senior administration official at the Department of Homeland Security said the memo in the news report was an early draft that never made it to the secretary and was not seriously considered by the department.

The A.P. said the memo called for the militarization of immigration enforcement by authorizing state governors to mobilize up to 100,000 National Guard troops to find people who are not authorized to be in the United States and send them home.

The troops would be acting to carry out President Trump’s Jan. 25 executive order, in which he directed the construction of a wall along the border with Mexico and called for a more aggressive effort to deport undocumented immigrants.

Increasing the number of people deported will require more resources at the border and in the nation’s interior. Mr. Trump’s order called for a larger number of border patrol and customs agents, but that would require more money from Congress, something that is many months away, at best.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/17/us/politics/national-guard-illegal-immigrants-report.html?_r=1

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©