Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise today with great sadness to honor the life and legacy of my dear friend, Captain George Frank Myles, Jr. George passed away peacefully on March 4, 2018 at the age of 69 in Boca Raton, Florida. He was a husband, father, grandfather, brother, nephew, uncle, friend, and dedicated public servant. George is survived by his wife of 46 years, Jacqueline Williams Myles; their three daughters: Tequisha, Kendyll, and Kersti Myles; one grandchild Savannah; sister, Fossteen Reese (Ellenwood, GA); brother, Michael Myles (Augusta, GA); aunt, Juanita Phillips (Decatur, GA); and numerous nieces, nephews, cousins, and godchildren.

A native of Augusta, Georgia, George was a star football and basketball player at T.W. Josey High School. Through football, he attended Morris Brown College in Atlanta, GA. In 1970, George graduated with a Bachelor's degree in Sociology and a Minor in Psychology. That same year, ``Brick'' Myles, as he was known on the football field, was drafted by the Miami Dolphins. As his professional football career was beginning, his draft number was called to serve his country. As the first African American to graduate from the Georgia Military Institute's Officers Candidates School in Milledgeville, Georgia, George subsequently joined the Florida National Guard.

In 1971, George went to work for Sears, Roebuck & Co., and became a manager there in 1983. He served as General Manager at the Westside Mall in Miami, and at SearsTown in downtown Fort Lauderdale. George always made it a priority to diversify the workforce by employing local minority residents. In 1991, he retired from Sears to start his own business.

George entered politics in 1993, where he was a Commissioner for the City of Lauderhill. During the course of his career, George served on the boards of numerous community organizations such as the Greater Fort Lauderdale Chamber of Commerce, Urban League of Broward County, the United Negro College Fund, National Conference of Christians and Jews, Broward County Girl Scouts of America, as well as countless other organizations.

Mr. Speaker, George's civic engagement in our community will never be forgotten. He was a true gentleman, who served this nation and our great state with distinction. George's positive contributions to the community were a true reflection to his generosity, humor, love of public service, and family.

I was so truly honored to have known George, and to call him my friend. My thoughts and prayers are with his family and friends during this most difficult time. He will be dearly missed.

Mr. Speaker, as the Ranking Democratic Member of the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe (U.S. Helsinki Commission), I rise today to denounce the human rights abuses taking place across the globe. In particular, I call attention to the ongoing Syrian Civil War.

Since 2011, it is estimated that almost 500,000 Syrians have been killed with millions more displaced, creating a refugee crisis across Europe and the Middle East. On March 15th, we will sadly mark the seventh anniversary of the Syrian Civil War, which is one of the bloodiest wars of the last 70 years.

I traveled to Syria in January 2010 and personally met with President Bashar aI-Assad. As I pressed him on the importance of honoring the right of his people to exercise their civil liberties and fundamental freedoms, I knew immediately that he would not give in. Many others, like me, recognized this long before civil war erupted. And yet, years have passed without the necessary effort by the international community to stop the violence.

On May 28, 2013, I sent a letter to former President Barack Obama and Ambassador Susan Rice, urging them to support imposing a no-fly zone over Syria, particularly in light of the continued indiscriminate shelling of innocent civilians and the use of chemical weapons by the Assad regime. I renewed my calls for a no-fly zone to President Obama again on September 25, 2015.

Mr. Speaker, what we have witnessed since the start of this civil war is indiscriminate, brutal attacks against civilians. The international community must no longer sit idly by and let more families be torn apart and more civilians become refugees.

According to the United Nations (UN), nearly 3 million Syrian children have lived their entire lives gripped by civil war. This is absolutely outrageous, and something needs to happen, and it needs to happen now.

Mr. Speaker, it has been seven years, let me repeat myself, seven years, since this civil war began. This crisis, in which millions of innocent Syrians find themselves today, demands our full attention and fervent commitment to creating a strategy that will bring an end to the deplorable conditions facing the Syrian people. The need for immediate and strong action remains. With each passing day, the violence has grown more sectarian, militarized, and radicalized at the cost of innocent Syrian lives.

Mr. Speaker, in a few moments I will manage today's rules; but right now, I would like to thank the staff of the Rules Committee on both sides for the hard work that they do, especially the staff director for the Democrats, Don Sisson.

I would like to also take a moment to recognize Ms. Kira Sisson, a senior from Albion High School in western New York. Kira is here with us today, along with classmates from her school. Don is her uncle.

Today we will not address Dreamers. Today we will not address the gun epidemic. I encourage all adult Americans to work with the students on March 24 that are coming here to Washington in a march for what they describe as our future. I hope adult Americans will encourage massive attendance at this march, and that this Congress will take action to abate the gun epidemic.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I would like first to thank the gentlewoman from Wyoming (Ms. Cheney), my friend, for yielding me the customary 30 minutes for debate.

Today's bills would modify Clean Air Act regulations, or the act itself, to give a handout to specified industries to emit more pollution into the air. These bills, in my view, would result in more smog, more fine particle pollution, and more toxic air pollution. The effects would be worse, resulting in more asthma attacks, more kids in emergency rooms, more bronchitis, more cancer diagnoses, and more birth defects.

Mr. Speaker, these bills represent a fundamentally unfair and deeply troubling approach to regulation. In bringing up these bills, the Republican-controlled Congress is granting favors to special interests at the expense of public health. Shocking, but not surprising. By bringing up these bills, the majority intends to overturn evidence- based, scientific decisions made by the Environmental Protection Agency, States, and courts after a transparent and extensive process.

To date, the Trump administration, with the help of the Republican- controlled Congress, has targeted 67 environmental rules. One of those rules was the requirement that mining companies prove they have the financial wherewithal to clean up their pollution. Another is the rule regulating airborne mercury emissions from fossil fuel power plants. And most recently, the administration announced it was targeting oil rig safety regulations, regulations that were implemented after the 2010 Deepwater Horizon explosion and oil spill, a spill that burned for 36 hours, released 4.9 billion barrels of crude oil into the Gulf of Mexico, spread 3,850 square miles, and resulted in billions of dollars of losses to the U.S. fishing industry and the Gulf Coast tourist industry.

Mr. Speaker, since passage of the Clean Air Act in 1970, America has made substantial progress in cleaning up this Nation's air. We have done this by following a fundamental principle: holding polluters accountable for their pollution.

Instead of following this commonsense, bedrock principle, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle insist on creating loopholes for a few favored industries: waste coal plants, brick manufacturers, and those who manufacture residential wood heaters.

Mr. Speaker, the first of these bills, the ironically titled SENSE Act, weakens the critical Mercury and Air Toxics Standards rule, which established the first national standards to address power plant emissions of toxic air pollutants. This Mercury and Air Toxics Standards rule requires coal-fired power plants to meet emissions standards for mercury, other metals, and acid gases.

Has the majority engaged in any in-depth analysis of what will happen when this rule is weakened? Has the majority filled its ranks with experts, scientists, and doctors who will be able to put forth a case for why undermining this rule is good policy? Of course not.

Mr. Speaker, here is what we know: The Environmental Protection Agency estimates that for every dollar spent to reduce pollution under this rule American families receive up to $9 in health benefits. In fact, the EPA estimated that, in 2016, the MATS rule would avoid up to 11,000 premature deaths, 2,800 cases of chronic bronchitis, 4,700 heart attacks, 130,000 cases of aggravated asthma, 5,700 hospital and emergency room visits, 6,300 cases of acute bronchitis, 140,000 cases of respiratory symptoms, and 540,000 days when people miss work. My Republican colleagues want to do away with those health benefits and, instead, permit favored industries to pollute more.

Mr. Speaker, the second measure combines two bills: H.R. 1917, the BRICK Act; and H.R. 453, the Relief from New Source Performance Standards Act. The BRICK Act unjustifiably delays reductions in toxic air pollution from brick manufacturers by allowing them to continue to pollute until all their lawsuits are exhausted. The bill throws out existing judicial process by providing a blanket extension for any compliance deadline, regardless of the merits of the case.

Under well established legal norms, the court of appeals for the district circuit may stay a rule during litigation if it finds that the party seeking the stay has demonstrated that there is a likelihood of success on the merits, the prospect of irreparable harm to the party requesting the stay, and, most importantly, whether granting the stay is in the public interest. To date, not one of the industry litigants have even asked the court to stay the Brick and Structural Clay Products rule. Not one. Presumably it is because they recognize that they cannot meet this legal standard.

Mr. Speaker, the existing judicial process is the appropriate method to seek a stay of the rule and is the preferable method to unnecessary congressional intervention proposed by the BRICK Act.

This brings me to H.R. 453, the Relief from New Source Performance Standards Act, which delays cleaner burning wood stoves until 2023, on top of the 5 years manufacturers already had to comply, exposing communities to additional years of unhealthy fine particle pollution, carbon monoxide, and volatile organic compounds.

In 2015, the EPA strengthened the pollution control requirements for new residential wood heaters. The new standards would cut fine particle pollution and volatile organic compounds from new wood heaters by almost 70 percent and will cut carbon monoxide pollution by 62 percent. The EPA even included provisions in the rule to help manufacturers achieve the new standards, giving the manufacturers 5 years to comply.

Mr. Speaker, these pollutants combine with other pollutants in the air from smog, black carbon, and benzene, harming the health of the American people, particularly our kids and seniors, who will have to pay for these special interest breaks with their health and, in some cases, with their lives. These three bills sacrifice Americans' health with additional years of unnecessary pollution.

Mr. Speaker, it is as disappointing as it is frustrating that we come here today to debate bills that will increase pollution in our country and also have very little hope--let me underscore that: very little hope--of ever becoming law. We have real work to do in this place, and these bills are not that work.

This body must turn its attention to finally addressing the gun violence epidemic that has taken over our country. Most recently at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, in a district adjacent to the district that I am privileged to serve, less than a month ago, a 19-year-old legally purchased a semiautomatic AR-15 and used it to methodically murder 14 of his former classmates and three teachers.

What was the response of this body? Well, we did prayers and thoughts, which is good. But did my Republican colleagues bring to the floor a bill that would ban assault weapons? Did they bring to the floor legislation to close the gun show loophole? Did they bring to the floor legislation that would raise the minimum purchase age for rifles? Or mandatory comprehensive background checks for gun buyers and ban bump stocks? Or allow the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to study gun violence?

No, Mr. Speaker. Instead this body offered, as I said, its thoughts and prayers.

And I have said it before and I will say it again today: those who stand in the way of legislation that will address our country's gun violence epidemic are increasingly culpable for its needless continuation.

So what we choose to talk about is pollution. What we should be talking about is the gun epidemic, and I will get to DACA a little bit later in my closing.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, 6 months ago, Donald John Trump decided to end the DACA program, a program which gave hundreds of thousands of hardworking young people hope for the future. He gave Congress until March 5--that was 2 days ago--to pass a bill. Since then, House Democrats have tried 23 times to pass bipartisan legislation to fix this problem. Donald John Trump even tweeted: ``Total inaction on DACA by Dems. Where are you?''

Well, Mr. President, where we are is right here, waiting for this deal that you say can be made. Yet, on 23 occasions, it was our friends on the other side of the aisle who refused to make a deal and rejected even considering the bipartisan Dream Act that was deadlined by you, Donald John Trump, on March 5.

We need to address this vital issue now. Approximately 120 Dreamers lose their status each day. Over 22,000 have lost their status since the administration ended the program.

Mr. Speaker, I implore my colleagues: Let's do something now to lift the cloud that hangs over these young people who are American in every way except on paper.

Mr. Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I am going to offer for the 24th time an amendment to the rule to bring up H.R. 3440, the Dream Act. This bipartisan, bicameral legislation will help solve the problem created by Donald John Trump's decision to end the DACA program.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of my amendment in the Record, along with extraneous material, immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Costa), my good friend, a member of the Agriculture and Natural Resources Committees of this Congress, who will discuss our proposal.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I have watched this last year as members of the Republican majority worked diligently to eliminate Federal environmental regulations that serve to keep the American people safe from harmful toxins in their air and water.

I couldn't help but be amused by my colleague on the right's comments at the end that we will be using sticks instead of bricks. Very clever. But the real truth of the matter is, in certain parts of the world--and I would urge him to visit some of them--there are examples of things other than brick for construction. I have no quarrel with the brick industry. I just urge--and in many instances they are already doing it--that they do everything they can not to pollute the environment.

I have watched members in the Republican majority work relentlessly for special interest groups instead of working for all of the American people. I have watched members of the Republican majority put the wish list of the powerful corporate gun lobby ahead of the safety of the American people.

On Monday, we all watched a self-imposed Republican deadline slip by, to the detriment of thousands upon thousands of young people in our country who we have identified as Dreamers, young people who know no other country as home than the United States of America. Every day of inaction on the part of my friends across the aisle means another day that families are needlessly and cruelly made to live under the threat of being torn asunder.

My colleague, Lois Frankel, and I were at a men's club before a couple of hundred of men in the Valencia Cove in Boynton Beach. The question was put to both of us: Why do we support illegal immigrants in this country?

We tried to make the distinction for him with reference to Dreamers and the fact that all of these young people were brought here against their volition by their parents. So it is the Dreamers that we are supporting. I think he finally understood the importance of our doing comprehensive immigration reform in this country.

Democrats have offered to bring the Dream Act to the floor now 24 times. We are going to give them one more chance. We have done it 23, and every single time this effort has been blocked by the majority.

To address my friend who correctly cited that we were bringing this up: It is not so much to change the topic of the day. We don't have that prerogative. But we do have embedded in this rule the prerogative to bring a previous question, and that can be on any subject that we choose. What we choose to do is to prioritize things that we consider to be important. It would not have blocked this particular measure.

But the fact is, enough is enough. The President says he wants to fix this problem. The Speaker says he wants to fix this problem. We on this side of the aisle clearly want to fix this problem. So let's do it now.

Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote on the rule, on the previous question, and on the underlying bills.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Speaker, it is my great privilege to rise today to honor Ms. Francesca Alfano, for her outstanding community service work in her hometown of West Palm Beach, Florida.

Ms. Alfano was one of five students selected by Florida's Hometown U.S.A. Program, Inc. this year. She is a high school junior at Alexander W. Dreyfoos School of the Arts, a public high school located in West Palm Beach, Florida. She is the daughter of Monique McCall and Gianpaolo Alfano.

Throughout this year, Ms . Alfano will proudly represent West Palm Beach as she travels to visit nursing homes, children's hospitals, Veteran's hospitals, charity events, and other activities throughout the State of Florida.

She certainly reflects the values of Florida's Hometown U.S.A. Program, Inc., which encourages and supports students who have a desire to volunteer. There is truly no limit to the difference students like Ms. Alfano can make in the lives of their neighbors with the support of organizations like Florida's Hometown U.S.A., Inc.

Florida's Hometown U.S.A. Program, Inc. is a non-profit educational youth organization, which has received Disney's Helping Kids Shine Award, Disney's VoluntEAR of the Year, the Governor's Points of Light Award from former Governor Jeb Bush, and the national President's Daily Points of Light Award from former President George W. Bush.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud that Ms. Francesca Alfano represents my district. She is a student and community member whom we can all admire and respect. I commend her for her deep commitment to volunteer work, and wish her the best as she pursues her high school diploma and beyond.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Ms. Holly Adams. Holly has been an intern in my Washington, D.C. Congressional office since the beginning of January, through the Uni-Capitol Washington Internship Programme (UCWIP).

For the past 19 years, the program has paired students from nearly a dozen partner universities in Australia with offices on Capitol Hill, giving hundreds of students the opportunity to work in the halls of Congress. I have been honored to host a number of extremely talented interns through the UCWIP. Holly is, of course, no exception.

Holly is currently enrolled at Deakin University in Geelong, Victoria, where she is pursuing a Bachelor of Laws Degree and a Bachelor of International Studies Degree: As a student of International studies, she has already travelled extensively, participating in international politics study tours in Boston, Philadelphia, Washington, New York, as well as Tokyo.

Holly has proven herself to be a very hardworking and dedicated individual. Throughout her internship, she has interacted extensively with my constituents, by drafting correspondence, helping to address questions, comments, and concerns for those contacting or visiting my office. She has also attended a number of hearings and briefings on a wide range of topics facing our nation and world. '

Indeed, Holly proved herself to be so capable, she prepared a FY2019 Programmatic Request letter for circulation throughout the U.S. House of Representatives on rail safety. It is no wonder that she was chosen by her classmates to give the ``valedictory'' speech at her program's closing reception.

Last year, Holly was accepted to study international human rights at Kings College, London. I have no doubt that she will do great as she continues her studies. I am proud to congratulate Holly on all of her achievements, and to thank her for everything that she has done for my office, my district, state, and our country. She has a very bright and exciting future ahead of her, and I wish her the very best.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Ms. Holly Adams, Holly has been an intern in my Washington, D.C. Congressional office since the beginning of January, through the Uni-Capitol Washington Internship Programme (UCWIP).

For the past 19 years, the program has paired students from nearly a dozen partner universities in Australia with offices on Capitol Hill, giving hundreds of students the opportunity to work in the halls of Congress. I have been honored to host a number of extremely talented interns through the UCWIP. Holly is, of course, no exception.

Holly is currently enrolled at Deakin University in Geelong, Victoria, where she is pursuing a Bachelor of Law Degree and a Bachelor of International Studies Degree. As a student of International studies, she has already travelled extensively, participating in international politics study tours in Boston, Philadelphia, Washington, New York, as well as Tokyo.

Holly has proven herself to be a very hardworking and dedicated individual. Throughout her internship, she has interacted extensively with my constituents, by drafting correspondence, helping to address questions, comments, and concerns for those contacting or visiting my office. She has also attended a number of hearings and briefings on a wide range of topics facing our nation and world. Indeed, Holly proved herself to be so capable, she prepared a FY2019 Programmatic Request letter for circulation throughout the U.S. House of Representatives on rail safety. It is no wonder that she was chosen by her classmates to give the `valedictory' speech at her program's closing reception.

Last year, Holly was accepted to study international human rights at Kings College, London, have no doubt that she will do great as she continues her studies. I am proud to congratulate Holly on all of her achievements, and to thank her for everything that she has done for my office, my district, state, and our country. She has a very bright and exciting future ahead of her, and I wish her the very best.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life and legacy of Ms. Carolyn Morrow Cheney. Carolyn was a loving mother, grandmother, and great grandmother. She passed away peacefully on February 8, 2018, surrounded by her family and friends, after a hard fought battle with cancer.

I was so grateful to be able to speak with Carolyn before her passing. In the final moments of her life, she was both generous and kind, and I am extremely thankful for her many years of friendship.

Carolyn started her career in Washington in 1972 as a staffer for Congressman James R. Jones (D-OK), and quickly moved through the ranks, while also juggling the responsibility of being a single mom. From 1976 until 1983, she served on the Commission on Administrative Review, as Chief of Staff to Congressman Fred Richmond (D-NY), and as Staff Director of the Agriculture Subcommittee on Domestic Marketing and Nutrition. Throughout her time

on Capitol Hill, Carolyn made positive contributions to House ethics, food stamp programs, and the 1981 Farm Bill. She was known for her ability to gracefully work ``across the aisle.''

After her stint on the Hill, Carolyn was charged with opening Staley Continental's first Washington office, where she was promoted to VP for Government Affairs, the first female executive in Staley's 75-year history. Starting in 1991, Carolyn represented the Sugar Cane Growers Cooperative of Florida and the Domino and C & H refineries. While tirelessly advocating on behalf of the sugar industry and Florida producers, she helped pass five Farms Bills, as well as assisted U.S. officials while they negotiated trade deals.

Carolyn was a founding member of the American Sugar Alliance, where she served as its valued Chair five times. Throughout her tenure representing the sugar industry, she generously gave her time and advice, leaving a lasting impact on numerous careers. Her professional accomplishments led the Sand Springs (OK) Education Foundation to induct her in the Hall of Fame in 2010.

Throughout her lifetime, Carolyn served on the board of the Center for National Policy, the American Sugar Alliance, the Friends of the National Arboretum, and the Board of the Association for the Preservation of Historic Congressional Cemetery. Beginning in the 1990s, Carolyn started worshipping at the Christ Church, where she served on the Vestry from 1992 to 2002 as Senior Warden. She also served on and chaired the Finance Committee, volunteered to arrange flowers for the alter, read lessons, and lead prayers of the people.

Carolyn will be remembered for her deep personal friendships, generosity, humor, love of politics, current events, books, fine dining, the Nationals, theater, gardening, music, and her church. Fond memories of her will forever remain with her son, Lance Stephen Cheney, sisters, Mary Morrows Manes, Marty Morrow Morris, and Vicki Morrow Sisney, as well as her grandsons Dale Hay Baker, Tre Conterez and great grandchildren Gunnar and Gabriel Baker.

Mr. Speaker, I was so honored to have known Carolyn and to call her my friend. My thoughts and prayers are with her family, friends, and colleagues during this most difficult time. She will be dearly missed.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Buck) for yielding me the customary 30 minutes for debate.

I rise today to debate this rule, the Common Sense Nutrition Disclosure Act, the Mortgage Choice Act of 2017, and the Small Bank Holding Company Relief Act of 2018.

H.R. 772 would amend the labeling requirements for nutrition information displayed by restaurants and other retail food establishments. This measure would unnecessarily complicate and further delay the implementation of nutrition labeling requirements established by the Affordable Care Act.

In what can only be described as a rather astounding attempt to avoid good sense, this bill will make calorie and nutrition information less accessible and less useful to consumers at a time when we are spending $147 billion annually on healthcare measures related to chronic illnesses that are directly tied to obesity. Consumers need more access to this information, not less.

The second measure, H.R. 1153, the Mortgage Choice Act of 2017, would introduce some of the high fees that borrowers faced leading up to the 2008 mortgage and financial crisis. This bill would roll back important home-buyer protection reforms, taking us back to the days when the true cost of a loan could be obscured in mortgage documents to the detriment of home buyers everywhere.

The third measure, the Small Bank Holding Company Relief Act of 2018, would direct the Federal Reserve Board to triple the Small Bank Holding Company Policy Statement from $1 billion to $3 billion, allowing even larger banking institutions to use greater amounts of debt to finance acquisitions, seemingly ignoring the lessons

from the previous financial disaster that we continue to climb out of to this very day.

Indeed, these Financial Services bills would weaken and politicize the policies created after the financial crisis to identify and guard against systemic risk in our financial system; and will allow even larger bank holding companies to leverage themselves with debt when financing the purchase of other banks.

Reviewing this legislation, I had to ask myself: Are the memories of my Republican colleagues really so short that they do not remember the complete breakdown of our financial system only a few short years ago?

Let me remind my friends across the aisle that the financial crisis of 2008 was the worst economic downturn America has faced since the Great Depression. Four million homes went through foreclosure and 9 million Americans lost their jobs.

Yet, instead of supporting efforts to ensure a financial collapse of such magnitude does not happen again, the majority has, instead, chosen to weaken the very protections put in place to prevent it.

With this in mind, we are left with two questions of equal importance: On the one hand, why are the Republicans so set on weakening much-needed and proven economic protections and making it harder for people to knowingly buy healthy food? And, secondly, why are they doing so now?

Mr. Speaker, the government runs out of funding this Thursday at midnight. We, once again, are forced to stare down the very real possibility of another shutdown because the Republican leadership either cannot or will not govern in a mature and reliable manner. Instead, our country is forced to lurch from continuing resolution to continuing resolution for no discernible reason. I think we are coming up on continuing resolution number 5.

Rather than taking the time to address their ever-present inability to govern responsibly, we are here today to debate evidence of that very inability, namely, the three bills we will be asked to vote on shortly.

It strikes me as odd, and is certainly frustrating, that I must, once again, remind the majority that we have yet to pass a budget agreement that provides an equal increase to both defense and nondefense spending.

Caveat right there. Later today, when we take up the CR, it is likely going to be said by a lot of people that our primary responsibility is to provide for the defense of this Nation, and I agree 100 percent. But that does not ignore the secondary responsibility of promoting the general welfare, and there are a variety of measures that are unattended and need to be attended. I might add, military people, veterans, and others find themselves in need of those particular services that are unattended as well.

We have yet to enact disaster aid so that our fellow Americans in Florida, Texas, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, California, and southwest Louisiana can recover from the devastating hurricanes and wildfires.

We have yet to provide funding, and we will be talking about that a little bit later in our previous question request. We haven't provided funding for what we all know is the urgent opioid crisis. We have yet to protect hardworking Americans' pensions, and we have yet to see a serious proposal from Republican leadership to protect DREAMers and those whose temporary protected status will soon run out.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, every day, more than 115 Americans die from an opioid overdose. In 2016, the opioid epidemic claimed more American lives than car accidents and even breast cancer.

In order to tackle this growing crisis, we need to pass legislation that invests in effective solutions. Even President Donald John Trump agrees. Last year, he said: ``It is a national emergency. We are going to spend a lot of time, a lot of effort, and a lot of money on the opioid crisis.''

Well, Mr. Speaker, we have not spent a lot of time, a lot of effort, or a lot of money on this crisis. Instead, the President and the Republican Party spent most of last year trying to take

away healthcare from millions of Americans and passing a tax cut for billionaires and corporations. And to that, Mr. Speaker, I say: Enough. We need to act now.

For that reason, if we defeat the previous question, I am going to offer an amendment to the rule to bring up Representative Kuster's bill, H.R. 4938, the Respond to the Needs in the Opioid War Act.

This legislation would create a $25 billion opioid epidemic response fund to invest in programs that will help States respond to the epidemic over the next 5 years.

I happen to live in south Florida, which has an equivalent crisis with everyone around the Nation. The people with addiction problems seem to gravitate to several areas in south Florida, particularly Delray Beach and Palm Beach County, where I live.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of my amendment in the Record, along with extraneous material, immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from New Hampshire (Ms. Kuster) to discuss our proposal, who is a true champion on this issue.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I ask the gentleman from Colorado: Does Lamont own more than one establishment?

I yield to the gentleman from Colorado.

Does he own more than 20?

If he doesn't own more than 20, then he is not affected by this law. I just want you to know that. I am with you. I want Lamont to be successful.

Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, Democrats do not want to weaken financial protections keeping our economy stable and strong. Democrats do not want to make it harder for Americans to know the nutritional value of their food.

Rather, Democrats are ready to pass a budget that creates jobs and grows the paychecks of hardworking Americans. Democrats are ready to provide relief to our fellow Americans suffering from natural disasters. Democrats are ready to protect American's pensions. Democrats are ready to protect DREAMers; people who have known no other country than the United States; people, who, but for one piece of paper, are just as American as anyone who will walk in this Chamber today; people who served in the United States military, almost 1,000 of them.

Preferably, we would like to do that work in a bipartisan way. All we need is for the Republican Conference to stand up to the extreme faction in their party and to finally work with us.

Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote on the rule, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life and legacy of Mr. Raleigh R. Rawls. Raleigh was a gentleman and scholar, and dear friend of mine. He was a very strong family man, and a staple of our community for all of his professional life.

After completing his first semester of his senior year at Dillard High School in Fort Lauderdale, Raleigh was drafted into the United States Navy where he was honorably discharged in 1946. After completing his service, he applied and was accepted into Howard University and graduated with a Bachelor of Arts Degree in English. After graduating from Howard University, Raleigh worked for the Veterans Administration for three years as an insurance processor for veterans.

In 1953, Raleigh returned to his alma mater to attend law school, where he graduated in 1956. It was at Howard University Law School that Raleigh had the chance to engage with notables such as Dr. James Nabrit and Dr. George E.C. Hayes. Raleigh also witnessed history being made when he observed Attorney Thurgood Marshall practice arguing the case of Brown v. the Board of Education.

While many of his classmates remained in Washington, D.C. upon graduating, Raleigh made a conscious decision to return to the segregated south, so that he could influence young Black students. After passing the bar exam in 1957, Raleigh became the first lawyer to graduate from Dillard High School and the second Black lawyer to practice in Broward County.

Raleigh served the South Florida community in many capacities that included: a founding member of the TJ Reddick Bar Association, a founding member of the Broward County Urban League, a founding member of the Sistrunk Festival, a board member of the Boys and Girls Club of Broward County, a member of the Robert Bethel Post 220 of the American Legion, a member of the Community Service Council, a board member of the LA Lee Branch YMCA, a board member of the Old Dillard Museum, and a member of Dillard High School's Taskforce for Quality Education. Raleigh was also a lifetime member of the National Bar Association, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), and the Alpha Phi Alpha Fraternity, Inc., which he joined while attending Howard University.

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Raleigh R. Rawls will be remembered by the many people he touched in his 92 years of life. Fond memories of him will forever remain with his wife of over 50 years, Annie Ruth Robinson, and his four children: Regina, Rene, Renard (married to Michelle), and Rodney (married to Demetria), as well as his six grandchildren: Cameron, Reagan, Samara, Morgan, Nathan, and Keon. He was truly a blessing to the Fort Lauderdale community. I am so pleased to honor his life and legacy. He will be dearly missed.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Collins), my friend, for yielding me the customary 30 minutes for debate.

Mr. Speaker, I stand here today with the rest of my Democratic colleagues in utter amazement at the dizzying dysfunction exhibited by our friends across the aisle. For reasons beyond understanding, we have to vote on the reauthorization of section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act because late last year the Republican leadership chose to prioritize massive tax cuts for their wealthy donors over the safety of American citizens.

Like so many other important issues, House Republicans decided to punt on the reauthorization of 702 by simply extending it to January 19 of this year, coincidentally, the same date the government will possibly shut down.

Mr. Speaker, as a former judge and the former vice chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, I do occupy a unique vantage point in the ongoing debate between the need to steadfastly protect the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution while also ensuring that those in the intelligence community have the tools they need to keep our country safe from those who wish to do us grave harm.

Putting the finer points on this debate aside for a moment, I can tell you with complete certainty that such a debate deserves to be lengthy and thorough, neither of which have happened here.

I was concerned to learn, if not a bit dismayed, that the House Intelligence subcommittee which has oversight jurisdiction of the National Security Agency did not hold a single hearing on today's bill. In fact, the full committee did not even hold a single hearing on this important piece of legislation.

Think about that. As the Republicans approached the need to discuss the reauthorization of one of the more important tools to fight terrorism that, simultaneously, brings along legitimate and important Fourth Amendment concerns, the majority, in all their wisdom, thought it prudent to hold exactly zero hearings on such an important matter. That is a brazenly inept way to govern.

To add insult to injury, I am told that members of the committee were given about 36 hours to read the bill before having to vote it out of committee.

A side note here: the bill they were given 36 hours to review is not actually the bill we have before us today because the majority had to use a Rules Committee print to fix some of the most troublesome parts of the original bill in order to obtain my friend Ranking Member Adam Schiff's support. Mr. Speaker, without a doubt, that support did not come easily, and important changes were made to the bill as it was presented to the committee in its original form.

For example, Mr. Schiff was able to ensure the Republicans' unmasking language was removed from today's bill. The removal of such language ensures that one of the Republicans' most heinous political stunts is not codified into law. This was and is a significant improvement.

Moreover, the Republicans removed the controversial expansion of the definition of ``agent of foreign power,'' which concerned privacy and technology groups.

Today's bill also addresses what is known as ``abouts'' collection. This is the collection of communications that are not to or from a target but, rather, communications that merely reference the target. The NSA, itself, shut down this collection method earlier this year.

The legislation before us today will allow such collection to resume, but only if the NSA first devises a way of doing so that addresses privacy concerns, obtains permission from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, and Congress does not object after a 30-day review period.

Now, this may seem to be a better option than what I am sure many, if not most, Republicans wanted, which is the full-scale reimplementation of ``abouts'' collection, but considering how much difficulty the majority has in simply keeping the lights on around this place, I think it is fair to question their ability to provide meaningful oversight in just 30 days. Again, this is simply evidence for the need to return back to regular order under which bills are fully and fairly considered.

Regardless of where one comes down on this issue, I can assure you that there are Members on both sides of the aisle that are sick and tired of being shut out of important policy discussions concerning subjects like those before us today.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lofgren), my friend from the Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration and Border Security.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I am amused by my friend from the Rules Committee's assertion that today, because of protests with reference to DACA, members of my party were protesting that concern.

I am also amused that they are in the majority, and she accuses us of delaying, when, in fact, this measure was scheduled 2 or 3 months ago and could have been brought to the floor, but, no, they were busy about tax cuts, and so they didn't get around to allowing for this important matter to be brought to the floor.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lofgren) to respond to the gentleman from Georgia.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee), the ranking member of the Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations and a good friend of mine.

Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentlewoman from Texas.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Washington (Mr. Heck).

Mr. Speaker, I would advise that I have no further speakers and I am prepared to close.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, the United States House of Representatives is known as the people's House, yet the people's representatives continuously are shut out of policy discussion after discussion. They are shut out of writing bill after bill, and they are shut out of offering any meaningful amendments.

Quite simply, Mr. Speaker, if the people's representatives are shut out, then the people are shut out. If you look around at how the majority is running this place, through a historically closed process, the result is not at all pretty.

I have some advice for my Republican friends. If, like this side of the aisle, you spent more time working on policies that help the American people instead of the wealthy and rich corporations who are, I might add, doing just fine, you would likely not only see more legislative successes, but you would be able to spend more time on important issues like this critically important issue, the extension of section 702.

Mr. Speaker, as is clearly evident, Democrats remain ready to work in a bipartisan manner to accomplish all that remains left to do for the American people. We are ready to fund the government and provide for smart investments for the future of our country.

We are ready to pull the hundreds of thousands of DREAMers out of unnecessary limbo and provide them with the status they deserve. We are ready to go forward with comprehensive immigration. We are ready to provide the funding and authorization needed to give millions of low- income children the health insurance they need. We are ready to fix our roads and our bridges and our railways and air trafficking. We are here and waiting, but time is running out.

Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote on the rule, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Keiser University on celebrating its 40th anniversary. In doing so, I am pleased to be joined by colleagues of mine in the Florida Congressional delegation on introducing a resolution to mark this important milestone.

Keiser University was the vision of Dr. Arthur Keiser and his mother, Ms. Evelyn Keiser. In 1977, they set out to create a university designed to better serve adult learners seeking a career-focused education. Today, Keiser University proudly offers over 100 degree granting programs, and was recently ranked as the second best Florida College by the prestigious U.S. News & World Report's Best Colleges 2017, rankings in the South region.

Over the past 40 years, Keiser University has been a shining example of what one can achieve through hard work and dedication. It has grown to become the third largest not-for-profit university in Florida, and boasts more than 66,000 alumni. The University has even stretched beyond the borders of the United States, establishing campuses abroad in Nicaragua, Moldova, and China.

Since coming to the U.S. Congress, I have watched Keiser University grow and expand its reach. Today, it has an annual economic impact of approximately $3 billion in Florida, and benefits our residents with over 30,000 direct and indirect jobs each year.

Keiser University's philosophy of putting students first is to be commended. They have proven themselves to be a home for quality higher education, and a source of great pride to the people of Florida. I am truly honored to represent Keiser University in my Congressional district.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to recognize Keiser University on its 40th anniversary with colleagues of mine in the Florida delegation. I wish Dr. Arthur Keiser, his mother Ms. Evelyn Keiser, Ms. Belinda Keiser, and the Board of Trustees many more years of continued success.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce the Build America Act of 2018, legislation that will significantly increase the size and scope of two very successful merit-based infrastructure grant programs without adding a penny to the national debt. Specifically, this legislation would remove the Capital Investment Grant Program (CIG), also known as New Starts/Small Starts, and the Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery Grant Program (TIGER Grants) from the annual appropriations process, establishing them as mandatory programs with permanent and expanded funding. My bill proposes to increase TIGER funding to $3 billion

annually, and to increase CIG funding to $9 billion.

These grants have helped local communities prioritize their own projects; however they have been chronically underfunded in the past. For instance, since 2009, Congress has dedicated nearly $5.1 billion for eight rounds of TIGER funding, yet the program received $10.1 billion in applications in FY2015 alone. The process is competitive, and allows the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) to reward applicants that exceed eligibility criteria and demonstrate significant non-Federal funding commitments.

By increasing these funding levels and removing the programs from the annual appropriations process, we will take the guesswork and uncertainty out of the programs. This in turn will allow communities around the country to submit funding requests for merit-based awards for projects of national, regional, or metropolitan-area significance. The projects include construction and repair of roads, bridges, and tunnels, the installation of high speed internet, revitalization of drinking water, and the construction and expansion of fixed-guideway public transportation systems, including subways, light rail, commuter rail, and bus rapid transit (BRT).

Mr Speaker, we have talked about prioritizing a large-scale infrastructure package for years. Congressional Democrats recently unveiled a trillion-dollar plan to make these investments and create tens of thousands of jobs. However, like so many other proposals, it was rejected out of hand by the Majority. Despite controlling the House, the Senate, and the White House, the Majority has not yet offered any plan of their own. All the while, the situation continues to grow worse.

Every four years, the American Society of Civil Engineers' issues a ``Report Card'' for America's Infrastructure. The report depicts the condition and performance of American infrastructure, assigning letter grades based on the physical condition and needed investments for improvement across 16 major infrastructure categories. The most recent report card was issued last year. Among the national rankings, transit systems were rated a D- and roads were rated a D.

Dams: D.

Drinking water: D.

Inland waterways: D.

Levees: D.

We need to move this process forward. I am therefore proud to offer my own legislation today--not for a massive, all-encompassing infrastructure package--but rather, for a common sense expansion of successful programs based on need and merit. I urge my colleagues to consider it without delay, so that our country can begin making the investments it desperately needs.

Mr. Speaker, my dear friend that just spoke with reference to acting, let me tell you what action was undertaken with reference to CHIP.

Prevention money was used as the pay-for. So, somehow or another, that action doesn't rub some of us in the right way.

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a letter from the Congressional Black Caucus to Speaker Paul Ryan.

Congressional Black Caucus,

December 21, 2017.

Paul Ryan,

Washington, DC.

Dear Speaker Ryan: On behalf of the Congressional Black

Caucus (CBC), I write today to strongly urge you to provide a

more permanent solution for close to 9 million children

enrolled in the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP)

and more than 27 million people that visit Community Health

Centers (CHC's) for critically needed health care. It is

completely irresponsible for Congressional Leaders to have

created this crisis. Moreover, it is now unconscionable for

Congress to head home for the holidays without taking action

to right this wrong.

The holidays are a time to reflect on how fortunate we are

and help those in need. In that vein, the CBC will not

support a Continuing Resolution unless CHIP is reauthorized

and fully funded for five years and Community Health Centers

are reauthorized and fully funded for two years. Moreover,

the offsets for these programs must not harm other vulnerable

communities by reducing funding for other programs, such as

the Prevention Fund. For this to be the state of play one day

after giving away $1.5 trillion to huge corporations and the

wealthy is absurd and offensive.

Close to 2 million children across this country are in

danger of losing CHIP coverage in January, with another 1

million set to lose coverage in February. A short term

approach to providing these children and their families with

certainty is absolutely irresponsible. Without swift

reauthorization and fully funded coverage, young lives hang

in the balance. Congress' failure to act will set off a chain

of dire-consequences for children, as well as their families,

communities, and states. A family without insurance is a

family more likely to fall victim to financial crisis related

to medical costs, such as bankruptcy.

Similarly, Community Health Centers play an essential role

in low-income communities as they protect and expand access

to critical and affordable care. The Community Health Centers

Fund (CHCF) provides mandatory funding for federal health

centers, which provide primary, dental, and other supportive

care in medically underserved areas. Robust and reliable

support for Community Health Centers results in more health

centers, an increased number of patient visit, and more

available services. These services save lives, especially in

communities struggling to provide affordable care to poor,

largely minority communities.

The CHCF is even more essential to the more than 27 million

people it helps support in light of recent efforts to the

dismantle our nation's health insurance market. As you well

know, the elimination of the Affordable Care Act's individual

mandate will add 13 million uninsured Americans, increase

premiums by 10 percent, and make it harder for sick people to

get insurance.

The Congressional Black Caucus has been the conscience of

this Congress since its inception in 1971. We have provided

moral leadership and courageous advocacy for our constituents

and for all Americans that have felt disenfranchised or left

behind. At the time of year when we are supposed to be most

charitable, it is urgent that Congress act to reauthorize

CHIP and Community Health Centers and provide robust funding

for both. Children and families do not need to spend the

holidays worrying about their health. It is time for Congress

to do what it is responsible and moral. Accordingly, the CBC

will not support any legislation to prevent a shutdown unless

these critical programs are addressed.

Sincerely,

Cedric Richmond,

Chair.

Mr. Speaker, I lift from it one paragraph that says:

The holidays are a time to reflect on how fortunate we are

and help those in need. In that vein, the Congressional Black

Caucus will not support a continuing resolution unless CHIP

is reauthorized and fully funded

for 5 years and community health centers are reauthorized and

fully funded for 2 years.

Mr. Speaker, this morning in the Rules Committee, beginning at 8--I might add, we were noticed that we were going to meet last night at 10, but we did not meet, and then we came in early this morning--the distinguished minority leader and the minority whip, along with the leader of the Hispanic Caucus, appeared and stayed for 2\1/2\ hours discussing the fact that we are leaving things on the table, but, more specifically, addressing the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program.

But let's talk about the things that we are leaving on the table:

We are doing nothing about long-term flood insurance.

We are doing nothing about Perkins loans that have expired.

We are not funding or addressing the opioid epidemic.

We are not offering legislation to help save failing pensions in this country.

I talked with some teamsters from Michigan the other day with tears in their eyes concerned about their pensions.

We are doing nothing with reference to long-term, bipartisan reauthorizing for CHIP and community health centers.

We are doing nothing about the FISA reauthorization.

We are not raising the defense and non-defense spending caps.

We are leaving Medicare extension on the table.

And that is just a to-do list that is partial that we are not addressing.

But let me get in the weeds on something that the public doesn't quite understand.

196 people appeared right over here and signed what is called a discharge petition to bring DACA to the floor; 34 Members of the House of Representatives sent a letter to the Speaker. If you combine those numbers, you have 218.

My distinguished Rules Committee chair and I had a colloquy this morning where we discussed that matter.

And the fact of the matter is I believe that it would pass if it were put on the floor.

But do you know what is more important? We had 58 closed rules in this Congress, completely closed. And to put that into context, we averaged 25 closed rules a year in the 4 years the Democrats were in charge.

The Dream Act is a perfect example of this. As Members are well aware, we have tried time and time again to get a floor vote on the Dream Act.

Mr. Speaker, we all know that this CR is the last train leaving town. You have given millionaires and billionaires help. Let's give the DREAMers a Merry Christmas.