By: Thomas Fitzgerald
Inquirer Staff Writer
November 10th, 2009

Rep. John Adler (D., N.J.) broke from most of his party in the U.S. House to vote against the massive overhaul of the nation's health system, saying the legislation would fail to flatten the ever-rising cost of care.

Adler, narrowly elected last year to represent South Jersey's competitive Third District and a potential Republican target in 2010, was one of 39 Democrats who voted against the bill late Saturday.

"Individuals and small businesses and taxpayers already can't afford these spiraling health costs," Adler said yesterday. "We've got to figure out a way to slow that growth."

The House passed its health package by a slim margin, 220-215, handing a victory to President Obama and Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.). But the road ahead is uncertain.

The Senate, where conservative Democrats have more power, is considering less expansive versions of health-care legislation. Whatever passes there must be reconciled with the House bill.

All but eight of the dissenting House Democrats represent districts carried by Republican John S. McCain in last year's presidential election. Obama won Adler's district with 52 percent of the vote. Adler was the first Democrat in more than a century to win the district, which includes Burlington and Ocean Counties and Cherry Hill in Camden County.

Democratic Gov. Corzine lost last week in an election that exit polls showed was heavily influenced by unaffiliated voters who shifted Republican. But Adler has criticized various drafts of the House bill as lacking cost-containment measures since at least June. He said that it would be wrong to "read anything" about public opinions of health-care legislation into Corzine's loss.

"I think the New Jersey election was primarily about Jon Corzine," Adler said, noting that every Democrat in the Assembly who sought reelection won last Tuesday.

In Pennsylvania, two Democrats representing conservative-leaning districts - Reps. Jason Altmire of Allegheny County and Tim Holden of Schuylkill County - also bucked the party to vote against the legislation.

Altmire, a former health-care executive, said that he voted against the bill because it did not control costs or remove inefficiencies in the system.

Holden told reporters yesterday that the bill did not contain strong enough language to stop undocumented immigrants from receiving government-paid health care, and that it also would cut payments to Medicare and Medicaid providers too much.

Besides, Holden said, the House bill could not pass in the Senate, and he did not want to be a political "pawn."

Adler said there were any number of proposals for reining in costs that those who drafted the House bill elected not to include. Among them, he said, were establishing an independent commission to control reimbursement rates for Medicare, use of electronic medical records, more vigorous efforts to reduce "defensive medicine" by providers worried about lawsuits, and reducing health insurance premiums for people who control their blood pressure, weight, and cholesterol.

He said that the employer mandate to provide insurance should be indexed to inflation. The bill would exempt businesses with payrolls of less than $500,000 a year from having to provide insurance to employees, but if that threshhold were not allowed to rise with inflation, an increasing number of small businesses would be burdened, Adler said.

"All the conversations I had with leadership and the White House were policy-driven, respectful and statesmanlike in tone, but there did not seem to be a willingness to involve cost containment," Adler said. "I could never get a good explanation for why we couldn't do it in this bill. It's frustrating."

He said, "My fear is future Congresses won't make the hard decisions."

U.S. Rep. Robert E. Andrews, a Camden County Democrat who represents the First District, was among the authors of the House version. He said the bill does address health-care costs, but added that there was room for improvement as the legislative process continues.

"John has raised some very valid concerns, and many of us are looking for ways to make the bill even more cost-effective," Andrews said. "I don't think any member is ever wrong for voting his conscience."

Dear Friend:

Your support has been extremely valuable to me over the years. I thank you once again for your friendship, advice, and concern.

I know many of you have been following the ongoing health care reform debate in Congress, and I wanted to share with you my position on the House bill.

This weekend I voted against the health care bill in the House of Representatives.

This has been an extremely difficult decision for me. My father, a small business owner, died when I was in high school, because he could not afford health insurance. One of the main reasons that I ran for Congress was to ensure that I could play a role in health care reform. I have thought hard about this decision for months, and I am disappointed that this bill will not solve our health care problems.

I strongly believe that we need health care reform in this country. All Americans should have access to quality health care, and this legislation makes great strides towards that goal. As you know, I support the idea of a public option and believe it would increase competition in our health care markets and give individuals choices. Furthermore, this legislation cracks down on many of the insurance industry abuses that currently add to the high price of health care costs.

While I support these provisions, this bill is not good enough. Every year, health care costs rise faster than wages and inflation.

Non-partisan, budget experts have stated that this bill will not reverse this trend. The difficult part of health care reform is restraining long-term health care costs, and Congress has ignored this critically important task. Without cost containment, working families and small businesses will not have the ability to purchase affordable health insurance in the future.

Since the health care proposal was released in June, I have been consistent in my beliefs that this bill could be better. I have spoken to President Obama, Vice President Biden, Speaker Pelosi and other Congressional Leaders letting them know that I want to support health care reform, but that we must find ways to bend the cost curve.

I will continue working to improve Congressional efforts to reform the health care system before any legislation is sent to the President. I look forward to continuing our conversation and hearing your ideas on how we can help our great country.

Thank you again for your friendship and support.

Sincerely,

John Adler

By: RAJU CHEBIUM
Courier-Post - Washington Bureau
November 6, 2009

WASHINGTON -- A New Jersey congressman who visited Afghanistan over the weekend said Thursday he supports increasing the number of U.S. troops there.

Rep. John Adler, D-Cherry Hill, visited Afghanistan with two other Democrats and three Republicans to determine "whether or not there was an endgame for success for America."

"I am convinced that with an additional number of troops . . . America would be able to complete its mission there," Adler told reporters in a conference call.

President Barack Obama is deciding whether to increase the U.S. military presence in Afghanistan and, if so, by how much. The top U.S. commander there, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, says about 40,000 additional troops are required, but some key congressional Democrats are skeptical.

Adler declined to speculate on how many more troops would be necessary, saying even U.S. military personnel in Afghanistan didn't provide a number.

Taliban insurgents have been weakened significantly where U.S. troop levels have increased, such as in the southern regions of Helmand and Kandahar, Adler said.

Fighting the Taliban "yard by yard" in villages such as Nawa in southern Afghanistan and helping the local population improve agriculture and make other changes has restored "some level of peace and tranquility," Adler said.

A total of $4 billion has been spent on development programs in Afghanistan since 2002, according to the U.S. Agency for International Development. USAID-funded projects include building power plants and providing clean water and other necessities to improve living conditions and win over the populace.

White House spokesman Robert Gibbs reiterated Thursday that a key military goal in Afghanistan is "dismantling, disrupting and ultimately destroying al-Qaida."

Adler said al-Qaida is mostly active in neighboring Pakistan. He said the main worry for U.S. troops in Afghanistan is disrupting the Taliban, the fundamentalist movement that once governed the country. The Taliban provided a refuge for al-Qaida leading up to the 2001 terrorist attacks.

By: CHRIS BISHOP
Burlington County Times
October 23, 2009

U.S. Rep. John Adler is optimistic that a potentially burdensome regulation on small business will not advance further.

The House of Representatives unanimously passed bipartisan legislation Tuesday that would protect small firms such as dental and accounting offices from the Federal Trade Commission's Red Flags Rule, which forces them to develop and implement an identity-theft program.

Adler, along with Congressmen Mike Simpson of Idaho and Paul Broun of Georgia, both Republicans, promoted the legislation.

Adler said Wednesday the proposal amends the Fair Credit Reporting Act to provide for an exclusion from the Red Flags Rule for health care practices and law and accounting firms with 20 or fewer employees.

Adler, D-3rd of Cherry Hill, estimated that a small firm could spend $1,000 to $1,500 on an identity-theft program.

In addition, the bill would create a system in which the FTC is given flexibility to waive the implementation of the rule for certain businesses.

"Small businesses are the backbone of New Jersey's economy," said Adler, a member of the House Financial Services Committee. "This is a common-sense fix to something the bureaucracy created."

Adler, a former New Jersey state senator, said doctors and dentists are not creditors and should not be forced to spend money to comply with unnecessary regulations.

"They don't require full payment at the time of service," Simpson said in a statement, "because they first bill the insurance company, then they bill the patient for the remainder of the bill. This system should not be treated the same as a loan with a financial institution. Health care is expensive enough. We don't need to create needless rules to increase costs even more."

According to Adler, the commission went beyond Congress' intent by considering nonfinancial, services-related industries to be "creditors" under the fair credit act of 2003.

Adler said the bill will go to the Senate for consideration. He said he hoped to have the legislation in place by the end of the year.

Moorestown Sun – October 15, 2009
By: Congressman John Adler

I am writing in response to a letter from Moorestown resident Stanley Ralph who asked me to elaborate on my position regarding health-care reform and government spending.

First, I would like to invite you to attend one of my next town halls or community meetings. Since January, I have hosted more than 50 meetings and events, including many public discussions on health care.

I firmly believe that we need health-care reform in this country. We cannot simply protect the status quo. But just as important reforming the system, Is making sure Congress does it right. The current bill under consideration by the House of Representatives is not the right bill for America.

Congress should not pass a reform plan that will increase our deficit, place an unfair financial burden on taxpayers and businesses, or leave our families and businesses to face continued escalating health-care costs. HR 3200 fails to do enough to curb costs and keep health care affordable in the long term.

With the summer behind us, Congress needs to get back to work and pursue many of the ideas I discussed with Burlington County residents during the last few months. We need to put other reforms on the table that will improve the quality of care while also lowering costs: