Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2740) to posthumously award a Congressional Gold Medal to Rabbi Michoel Ber Weissmandl in recognition of his acts of valor during World War II.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on this bill.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 2740, the Rabbi Michoel Ber Weissmandl Congressional Gold Medal Act of 2017, introduced on April 25, 2017, by our colleague, Representative Nydia Velazquez, cosponsored by Representative Mast of Florida.

The bill authorizes the award of a Congressional Gold Medal to the Jewish rabbi for his acts of valor during World War II to save many Jewish people from Slovakia from persecution, the atrocities and the Holocaust committed by the Nazis during the Second World War.

Mr. Speaker, I wholeheartedly support this legislation, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, Rabbi Weissmandl's life story is uplifting and his actions are inspiring. This Gold Medal is an overdue honor and is supported by 296 Members of the House.

Mr. Speaker, I urge its immediate passage, and I want to thank Chairman Hensarling, Ranking Member Waters, Representative Velazquez, and Representative Mast for their leadership on this important legislation.

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

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the families of the Commonwealth of Kentucky which suffers from the third highest opioid overdose mortality rate in the Nation, I rise today in support of H.R. 6, and I thank the chairman for his leadership on this.

This legislation marks a critical investment to help individuals and families struggling with addiction rise above addiction and transition back into the workforce.

Specifically, H.R. 6 includes my legislation, the CAREER Act, which creates a demonstration program to promote evidence-based transitional housing that pairs recovery support with life skills, workforce training, and job placement.

I would like to thank the many nonprofits in my home State of Kentucky for inspiring this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Brigadier General Benjamin F. Adams III. He is an exemplary leader who has served our nation for forty years in military service.

General Adams received his commission through the ROTC program at the University of Mississippi in 1978. He completed flight school in 1980 and spent 15 years on active duty with the United States Army. He has commanded at the company, battalion, and brigade levels. Active duty assignments included the United States Army Aviation Center, Fort Rucker, Alabama; the 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault) and the 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment (Airborne) at Fort Campbell, Kentucky; Army Reserve Personnel Center, Saint Louis, Missouri; and the Combined Forces Land Component Command, Kuwait and Baghdad, Iraq. He served as a military technician in the Kentucky National Guard as the Commonwealth of Kentucky's State Army Aviation Officer; J1 and Army Chief of Staff from September 1999 to November 2012.

General Adams' most recent service has been as Commander, Land Component Command, Kentucky Army National Guard. In this position, he served as an assistant and advisor to the Adjutant General of Kentucky. He was responsible for manning, training, and equipping a force of over 8,500 Army and Air Guardsmen.

Following a career of forty years of service, General Adams is retiring from Army service. He will continue to serve as the Kentucky Department of Veteran's Affairs Commissioner. His service there is valuable to all of Kentucky's many veterans.

It is my honor today to recognize this extraordinary patriot, Brigadier General Benjamin F. Adams, as he retires from Army service. His service and his leadership are greatly appreciated.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the exceptional service and the retirement of Master Trooper Darren Allen after 22 years of distinctive service from the Kentucky State Police (KSP).

Since February 1996, Master Trooper Allen has faithfully served the citizens of the Commonwealth of Kentucky. Throughout his career he has been awarded with the KSP Meritorious Service with a ``V'' Device, a Lifesaving Medal, and three Commissioner Commendations for his outstanding service.

Master Trooper Allen earned many of these distinctions while serving in the KSP East Drug Enforcement/Special Investigation (DESI) Section and the KSP Cannabis Suppression Branch. His expert knowledge and detective work were instrumental in helping to prevent the use and further distribution of countless narcotics throughout the Commonwealth, and likely the United States, for many years.

I had the pleasure of first getting to know Master Trooper Allen when he was assigned to serve on the prestigious Kentucky Governor's Executive Security Detail in 2003 when we both served at the pleasure of Governor Ernie Fletcher. Since then, Master Trooper Allen has been a friend and an advisor to me and my staff on law enforcement issues and how to best combat the narcotics crisis in this nation.

On behalf of the citizens of the Sixth Congressional District of Kentucky, I sincerely thank Master Trooper Allen for his service and devotion to the Commonwealth of Kentucky and for always holding the ``Thin Gray Line'' with honor and integrity.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Mary Pat Shely from Clark County, Kentucky. Pat has deep roots in Kentucky, as her ancestors settled in historic Boonesboro shortly after its founding by Daniel Boone.

As a young woman, Pat was a talented athlete and a champion in tennis, fencing, swimming, and golf. She taught herself to fly the Piper Cub that her father purchased for her. She was one of the first females allowed into the Civil Air Patrol in 1942. She served her nation honorably as part of the Kentucky Wing and earned the rank of 2nd Lieutenant.

Following her service during World War II, Pat graduated from the University of Kentucky in 1946. She later earned a master's degree from Columbia University. Pat had a career in education, teaching in colleges across the country. In 1963, she returned to Kentucky and began a career in agriculture on her family's farm in Clark County.

Mary Pat Shely is a well-respected member of her community, a good steward of the land, and an American patriot. As part of what has been described as The Greatest Generation, she served her nation well during World War II. For her faithful wartime service during this time, 2nd Lieutenant Shely and other members of the Civil Air Patrol were awarded the Congressional Gold Medal. This prestigious award, one of the highest civilian awards bestowed by the United States government, was presented to ``unpaid volunteer members of the Civil Air Patrol during World War II providing extraordinary humanitarian, combat, and national services during a critical time of need for the nation.''

It is my honor today to recognize this extraordinary Kentucky woman, Mary Pat Shely.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life of a special man, Mr. Frank Zupan of Frenchburg, Kentucky. Mr. Zupan is part of a special group of heroes that served our nation during World War II.

Mr. Zupan volunteered for the United States Army in 1942. Growing up in a suburb of Detroit, Michigan, he never handled guns. He learned quickly in the Army and was trained to fire a M1919 Browning machine gun. Mr. Zupan made his first beachhead landing in the Battle of the Aleutian Islands as U.S. troops fought to reclaim U.S. owned islands west of Alaska. He fought in many more battles in the Pacific as the war raged. Mr. Zupan's heroism earned him the Silver Star and the Bronze Star. He also received a Purple Heart after being injured in battle.

Mr. Zupan and his fellow veterans are true heroes. As members of the ``Greatest Generation'', they willingly served to protect and defend the freedoms that we enjoy today. I am humbled to honor the service of Mr. Frank Zupan before the United States Congress.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the First Baptist Church in Richmond, Kentucky on their 175th anniversary.

In 1843, Madison Campbell and other slaves came together in faith. They first built a log church that was the foundation for present day First Baptist Church. As the church grew, they built a brick building and expanded facilities over the years. Reverend Campbell served as pastor until 1896. The church has been led by nine devoted pastors over its history. Reverend A.C. Goodloe was the church's eighth pastor and was active in the civil rights movement.

First Baptist Church's current pastor is Reverend Dr. Robert Blythe, who has served since 1981. Under his pastorate, the fifth church building was constructed on the historic site of that first log cabin church. The church is an active part of Madison County, serving those in need. Over the past 175 years, countless lives have been touched by the word of God received at First Baptist Church. From humble beginnings, this church has grown and affected many lives in a powerful way. They have been Lighting the Way since 1843.

I congratulate the members of First Baptist Church in Richmond on their 175th anniversary and wish them many more years of successful ministry, serving God and reaching out to the community.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of major reforms included in the National Defense Authorization Act conference report regarding the Committee on Foreign Investments in the United States and export controls.

I thank the chairman of the Armed Services Committee for his excellent leadership in addressing the readiness crisis and giving our men and women in uniform the tools they need to defend our freedoms.

The House Financial Services Committee held four hearings on CFIUS reform, inviting a diverse set of witnesses that ranged from government officials who currently serve on CFIUS to members of the defense, intelligence, and business communities.

We also held numerous briefings and meetings with experts, equally diverse as those who testified before the committee, on the threat that China and other adversaries pose to the national security of the United States.

In the end, I am pleased to see we have a bipartisan, bicameral product that reflects the work and views of these experts.

Specifically, these critical reforms counteract the surge in malign foreign investment from China that threatens our national security by enhancing the review process of transactions where our enemies could steal technologies and infrastructure critical to the defense of our country.

The gaps that we have closed in security that China and other adversaries have circumvented from CFIUS review include noncontrolling investments, joint ventures, and acquisition of real estate near sensitive military sites.

At the same time, these reforms ensure that America's doors remain open to benign foreign direct investment that in 2016 added $894 billion to the value of the U.S. economy and that support 6.8 million workers today in this country.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank Congressman Pittenger, Senator Cornyn, Congressman Heck, Chairman Hensarling, Chairman Thornberry,

Chairman Crapo, Ranking Member Waters, and House and Senate leadership for their dedication to getting these much-needed reforms done in a bipartisan way. And I encourage my colleagues to support the underlying bill, the NDAA conference report.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life of a special man, Mr. John A. Palumbo, from Lexington, Kentucky, who passed away earlier this month at the age of 97.

Mr. Palumbo was born in 1921 in Schenectady, New York. As a youth, he was a boxer, winning a Golden Glove, and then moved to Lexington to attend the University of Kentucky.

During his time as a student, World War II was raging, and Mr. Palumbo volunteered for the United States Army Infantry 1st Division.

Following basic training, he was sent to England to train for the D- day invasion. He landed on Omaha Beach at H-hour plus 58 minutes, actually swimming ashore when his landing boat received a direct hit and sank.

He fought across Europe and received many citations for his brave service, including the World War II Victory Medal and the Bronze Star.

After the war, Mr. Palumbo returned to Lexington, finished his education, married Nancyetta, and earned a law degree from the University of Kentucky. He worked for years in the lumber business and, as a Lexington developer, contributed greatly to the city of Lexington. He was well respected in the business community and was active in several civic organizations.

Mr. Palumbo and his fellow veterans are true heroes. As members of the Greatest Generation, they willingly served to protect the freedoms we enjoy today.

I am humbled to honor the life of an American hero, Mr. John A. Palumbo, before the United States Congress, and I extend my deepest condolences to his family during this time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Con. Res. 119, expressing the sense of Congress that a carbon tax would be detrimental to American families and businesses and is not in the best interest of the United States.

Mr. Speaker, my colleague and friend from Massachusetts just said that we need to be addressing real concerns. Well, I respectfully submit, Mr. Speaker, that the loss of paychecks of tens of thousands of Kentuckians over the last decade, as a result of a war on fossil energy, is a major concern. Maybe not in Massachusetts, but men and women who have lost paychecks, whose lives have been devastated by overregulation, that is a real concern, Mr. Speaker.

This Congress, fortunately, in cooperation with this administration, is now leading our country back, not just toward energy independence, but energy dominance and strong economic growth, and, finally, jobs as a priority, and energy security, by rolling back onerous regulations that have harmed livelihoods and threatened our grid resiliency.

Mr. Speaker, implementing a carbon tax would not only harm these efforts, but it would result in massive job losses, lead to higher prices for families and businesses, and jeopardize our energy security.

My home State of Kentucky relies heavily on fossil fuels, as our coal resources provide our State thousands of jobs and deliver more than 83 percent of our electricity. This allows Kentuckians to enjoy some of the lowest average electricity rates in the Nation.

A carbon tax, Mr. Speaker, would be an attack on the poor. It would be an attack on people who cannot afford high electricity bills.

The implementation of a carbon tax would be detrimental not only to Kentucky's economy, but to the progress of our Nation, and the progress we are making toward energy resilience and freedom.

Instead of increasing government mandates and regulations on industries, and picking winners and losers, we should look for new, innovative ways to promote air quality and address environmental concerns. The best way to do that is not through central planning from Washington. It is to unleash free enterprises to encourage innovation and to harness the carbon cycle.

Mr. Speaker, I am not a climate denier. I am not a science denier. I am a climate thinker. I am a science thinker. Real science is not just about assessing cost only. It is about looking at benefits as well. Those supporting a carbon tax look only at costs, but not benefits, of coal and other fossil energy.

Coal provides cheap, plentiful, reliable energy over the long term. We should not want the most carbon-free energy. We should want the best energy. We should want the most reliable energy. We should want the most effective energy, energy that best facilitates human life, human flourishing, and human progress. And that is what fossil energy is.

Government mandates and central planning, like a carbon tax, add costs to private sector innovation, resulting in poor air quality and more, not less, global pollution.

Mr. Speaker, in conclusion, the goal should not be green energy. The goal should be the advancement of the human condition.

Mr. Speaker, I support H. Con. Res. 119, and I thank Representative Scalise, our whip, for his efforts on this important issue.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the JOBS and Investor Confidence Act of 2018, and I thank the chairman for his leadership.

If America wants to compete in the 21st century economy, then we need 21st century capital formation rules.

Currently, many of the securities regulations governing startups and investors arise from 1930s-era statutes. Because of this outdated legal architecture, the number of business startups is at a 40-year low, and the number of companies going public is the lowest it has been in 20 years. The result is fewer high-paying jobs, less retirement security, slower capital formation, and weaker economic growth.

Fortunately, the JOBS and Investor Confidence Act modernizes our regulation of capital markets, enabling greater access to capital for small businesses and entrepreneurs. Coupled with historic tax cuts and major banking reform that was enacted into law earlier this year, this JOBS bill represents the next step in robust economic growth that will boost wages, unleash startup enterprises, and finance the future of American small businesses.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote for the JOBS and Investor Confidence Act of 2018.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Zeldin), for his important leadership and his voice on this very critical issue and for being a stalwart defender of the rock-solid alliance between the American people and the State of Israel, and the important relationship that represents; Israel, of course, being an island of moderation in a very dark and dangerous part of the world.

When the United States is asked to make foreign policy decisions, it is my view and it is Congressman Zeldin's view that we should stand with our allies. We should stand with Israel. We should not stand with our enemies. We should not stand with the mullahs in Tehran. But, instead, we should stand with our ally who always opposed this dangerous Iran nuclear deal.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of President Trump's decision to withdraw from the Iran nuclear deal, also known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, and I agree with the President's assessment that the Iran deal gave too many benefits to Iran for too little in return.

I also want to thank my colleague and friend French Hill, who also serves with Congressman Zeldin and myself on the House Financial Services Committee, where the three of us have an important responsibility to the American people, our constituents, and our allies, and that is oversight of the Department of the Treasury's implementation and enforcement of sanctions.

More than 4 years ago, the Obama administration reached this flawed nuclear deal with Iran. Since then, the destabilizing role that this rogue regime has played in the Middle East has not waned, but, instead, it has grown. Despite all the concessions to Iran, the Iranian leadership continues to lead mobs of supporters chanting ``death to America'' and ``death to Israel,'' and promises to wipe Israel off the face of the planet.

The leadership in Tehran continues to pose a range of threats to the national security of the United States and the security of our allies in the region and beyond. As many observers have noted, the regime in Tehran does not see itself as leading a country focused on security and prosperity within its borders, but, instead, leading a revolution that it seeks to expand at the expense of its neighbors and the United States and it is allies.

Iran continues to represent the number one state sponsor of terrorism in the world. Iran has received significant sanctions relief under the Obama administration's flawed nuclear deal. The regime is selling oil on the international market. It has received access to tens of billions of dollars in funds held abroad, and it has signed deals worth more than $100 billion in foreign investments.

This includes, as the gentleman from Arkansas pointed out, $1.8 billion in cash that the Obama administration gave to Iran up front under the previous administration's false narrative that this agreement would help make the Middle East more stable and a safer place.

Yet, Iran continues to destabilize the Middle East and undermine U.S. foreign policy. The regime's Revolutionary Guard Corps and its terrorist proxy, Hezbollah, continue to prop up the murderous Assad regime in Syria and fuel tension across the region. Hezbollah has stockpiled tens of thousands of advanced rockets in Lebanon, allowing it to strike targets throughout Israel, and this is after the consummation of the Iran nuclear deal.

At home, the regime continues to deny the Iranian people basic human rights, while detaining several Americans. Iran's so-called moderate president, Hassan Rouhani, gave the order to ``expedite'' the production of intercontinental ballistic missiles capable of striking the United States while presiding over the most executions in 25 years.

There is, according to the defenders of the JCPOA, a false narrative that they perpetuate, and the media is complicit. The false narrative being that Iran is in compliance with the deal, and this is despite reports that Iran continues trying to illicitly procure nuclear equipment from Germany after the deal was reached. The Obama administration subsidized Iran's nuclear program by purchasing heavy water, a chemical used to make weapons-grade plutonium.

Furthermore, we know that this deal, by its own architecture, was not designed to ensure compliance, because there is no effective verification procedure embedded in the deal.

Under the current JCPOA, the United Nations International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors are not even allowed to check Iranian military sites, the sites that are most likely to be the places where Iran houses and conducts its nuclear testing. A comprehensive, no-notice inspection regime must be put into place in any future agreement, which President Trump has ensured would be part of his better alternative.

Ballistic missiles: In addition, Iran continues to develop and test ballistic missiles that threaten Israel and the United States. According to joint intelligence reports, Iran has launched well over 23 ballistic missiles since the signing of the JCPOA. Far from lessening the threat, the Iran nuclear deal emboldened Iran to continue to violate U.N. Security Council resolutions, specifically, a blatant disregard of U.N. Security Council Resolution 2231 that formally approved the Iran nuclear deal.

Specifically, that resolution called on Iran to not undertake any activity related to ballistic missiles designed to be capable of delivering nuclear weapons, including launches using such ballistic missile technology.

Ballistic missiles, Mr. Speaker, are the most reliable way to deliver nuclear warheads, and no country has maintained an expensive missile program without also aspiring to possess nuclear weapons.

The leadership in Iran in negotiating this agreement professed a commitment to civilian nuclear power.

Why then continue to develop ballistic missiles, Mr. Speaker, if you are committed to only peaceful nuclear power?

As former Secretary of Defense Ash Carter testified to Congress in 2016, President Obama's own Defense Secretary: The I in ICBM stands for intercontinental, which means having the capability to fly from Iran to the United States.

Intercontinental ballistic missiles, as our friend, Prime Minister Netanyahu, pointed out, are not designed for Tel Aviv. Those missiles are designed for Los Angeles, New York, Atlanta, and Chicago.

Support for Hezbollah hasn't waned since the Iran nuclear deal was consummated, since it was signed. Iran is and continues to be the largest state sponsor of terrorism, and current estimates indicate that Iran provides Hezbollah approximately $800 million annually. According to the State Department, Iran provides the majority of financial support for Hezbollah and Lebanon and has trained thousands of terrorist group fighters at camps in Iran.

Regrettably, this deal that provided billions of dollars in sanctions relief and billions of dollars in hard currency to the rogue regime in Tehran is fueling Iranian support for Hezbollah.

In addition to fighters, Hezbollah is believed to possess over 100,000 missiles. It has been reported that Iran has built weapons factories for Hezbollah in southern Lebanon, providing the ability to produce destructive munitions on its own near Israel. It has sent fighters to Syria on behalf of the Assad regime and helped train and develop Shiite militias furthering Iranian interests in Iraq and Yemen.

This combat experience in Syria and Iraq is particularly alarming as Hezbollah now has thousands of experienced fighters at its disposal who can be redeployed to other conflicts in the future. The Iran nuclear deal has fueled this export of terrorism.

Finally, reports indicate that Iran civilian airlines also participate in the conflict by flying arms and fighters to Syria from Iran and other locations in the Middle East. We have heard directly testimony in our committee as the House Financial Services Committee has conducted searching oversight over the implementation of the Iran nuclear deal that, in fact, this agreement has facilitated and fueled civilian airlines being used to send arms and fighters to support the murderous Assad regime.

Mr. Speaker, in conclusion, I joined my colleagues here tonight not opposed to diplomacy and not opposed to any Iran nuclear deal. In fact, all of us would like to see a peaceful denuclearization of Iran. We would like democracy and freedom for the people of Iran. We stand with the people in Iran. We are not against any agreement.

We simply stand against a bad nuclear deal that is not verifiable, that doesn't prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, but instead paves the way for Iran to have a nuclear arsenal. We stand opposed to a bad nuclear deal that threatens our allies, that threatens Israel, and that threatens the American people.

We believe that the President can and will negotiate a better deal for America, and it is incumbent upon Congress to help this administration access the leverage it needs to achieve that objective and to support his vision to help hold Iran accountable to the United States and our allies.

What would this agreement entail?

Why would a new agreement be better than the current JCPOA?

It would remove all of the flawed sunset provisions; it would require Iran to suspend any support of terrorist proxies; it would require Iran to permanently and irreversibly end its ballistic missile program; and it would include much better verification that would allow international inspectors access to all sites, including sites that are most likely to contain illicit nuclear activity.

Mr. Speaker, once again, I am proud to stand with the ally of the United States, Israel, and stand against our enemy, the mullahs in Tehran.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. Zeldin) again for his outstanding leadership and his passionate voice in defense of American national security and in defense of Israel and our other allies.

Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I especially thank the gentleman for his cooperative, constructive, and bipartisan approach to the legislation, and improving the legislation.

We are in agreement on this point, that such involvement could cover activity, including membership on the board of directors and observer rights. In addition, the gentleman makes note of board nominations. As we have seen under current law, CFIUS looks at nominations and the risks that may arise from them. The Broadcom deal was a case in point. However, the language in this bill makes this jurisdiction clearer.

The gentleman is right to focus on risks that a board member may pose who is acting on behalf of a foreign investor who nominates the member. The whole point of such nominations could be to involve the foreign investor in substantive decision-making in a way that results in national security risks.

H.R. 5841 could cover such a scenario. I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Foreign Investment Risk Review Modernization Act.

I want to thank the House authors of this bill, particularly the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Pittenger), for his outstanding leadership on this effort; and my friend, the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Heck); also the Senate authors, Senator Cornyn and Senator Feinstein; and House Chairman Hensarling, Chairman Royce, Chairman Nunes, Chairman Thornberry, and Chairman Walden; as well as House leadership for their efforts in bringing this nonpartisan legislation to the floor.

Just by that list, you understand how complex this issue is because it involves not only a multiagency effort of this government, it requires the concerted and cooperative efforts of many committees in this House and in Congress generally because of the shared jurisdiction.

In 2016, new foreign direct investment added $894 billion in value to the U.S. economy. Today, 6.8 million American workers are employed by international companies, including 20 percent of U.S. manufacturing workers.

In my own district in Kentucky, Toyota Motor Manufacturing, Kentucky, Inc. supports 8,500 jobs as a result of benign foreign direct investment, a great example of this. These are typically higher paying jobs. So it is critical that we preserve in the United States an open investment climate, to the extent possible, consistent with national security objectives.

But a comprehensive update to both the export control regime and the Committee on Foreign Investment in the

United States, or CFIUS as is it commonly called, is needed due to the massive surge in malign investments by the Chinese and other bad actors in U.S. assets.

This legislation closes loopholes in CFIUS' jurisdiction and modernizes our process for identifying critical technologies without duplicating agency efforts like earlier drafts of this legislation called for, all the while ensuring these transactions are thoroughly vetted in a timely manner so that America continues to attract much- needed foreign investment that does not implicate national security.

This legislation also authorizes CFIUS to review sensitive, noncontrolling investments in critical technology or infrastructure made by persons affiliated with countries of special concern or threatening actors.

These changes improve upon previous versions of the bill that failed to focus CFIUS' limited resources on the most serious threats and bad actors, including China.

Importantly, this legislation grants CFIUS the authority to review the acquisition of real estate near U.S. military installations and other important national security assets. The legislation uses a new and strengthened interagency export control process to review joint ventures and outbound activities. I want to thank Chairman Royce for his leadership on that point.

These reforms strike the right balance between bolstering national security and ensuring strong economic growth. I encourage my colleagues to support the legislation.

Mr. Speaker, this effort has been a success because we are balancing the imperatives of national security with maintaining an important open investment climate in the United States. Why that balance is so important is because preserving benign foreign direct investment and capital so that research and development in the United States can flourish is important not only to preserve our competitive edge in the global economy, it is important for national security.

Our economic strength contributes to our national security. We are striking

the right balance with this new FIRRMA legislation.

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of my legislation, H.R. 5735, the Transitional Housing for Recovery in Viable Environments Act, or the THRIVE Act.

I thank Chairman Hensarling, Chairman Duffy, and my colleagues on the House Financial Services Committee for their support and feedback on this legislation. I want to thank Chairman Hensarling for sharing that very compelling story about his constituent, Joshua. Unfortunately, so many of us have constituents with similar stories, and that is what we are trying to address here today.

We all know the opioid epidemic is a major health crisis that has impacted every community in every congressional district; 116 Americans die every day from opioid overdoses. My home State of Kentucky has the third highest overdose mortality rate in the country.

This week, the House is considering several pieces of legislation to address this epidemic, and in order to achieve meaningful progress in the fight against opioids in our Nation, Congress can no longer simply focus on prevention, enforcement, and treatment. We must also begin to implement policies that focus on long-term recovery. Our Federal housing programs are an underutilized resource in these efforts.

The THRIVE Act would make supportive housing more accessible to those most in need by allocating a limited number of Section 8 housing choice vouchers to nonprofits--nonprofits that have experience in housing. Not new nonprofits--nonprofits with a record of providing housing services, workforce development, job placement, financial literacy, and continued addiction recovery support for individuals who are transitioning out of rehab or a period of medication-assisted treatment and back into the workforce.

This legislation would only allocate either 10,000 or 0.5 percent of total housing choice vouchers, whichever is less, to evidence-based nonprofits serving people who are literally dying each and every day of opioid addiction and other substance abuse disorders. And the demonstration is limited to 5 years.

No one would have a voucher taken away from them, despite what my friend, the gentlewoman from California, is saying. No one would have a voucher taken away from them to create this demonstration program.

An estimated 198,000 Section 8 vouchers are turned over every year and returned to HUD, and it is from this amount that the demonstration would set aside only 10,000 to address a deadly national public health crisis.

Additionally, we made a commitment to working with our Democratic colleagues, including Congresswoman Sinema, who has signed a joint letter with me to request additional funding from the Appropriations Committee to support this demonstration, because we understand the urgent need for greater Federal investment to save lives. So the ranking member's argument really doesn't apply.

The THRIVE Act has received endorsements from over 140 housing and recovery organizations across the country, including Addiction Policy Forum, the American Academy of Addiction Psychiatry, National Association of Social Workers, Faces & Voices of Recovery, the Association for Addiction Professionals, and more than 100 others that are on the front lines of addiction recovery.

Mr. Chairman, HUD Secretary Ben Carson visited several of these transitional nonprofits in my district in Kentucky earlier this year, and he witnessed firsthand the success of these evidence-based models of recovery.

I would like to especially recognize St. James Place, Revive LifeHouse, the Hope Center, Shepherd's House, and Chrysalis House, among others, for their critical work in the Sixth District of Kentucky that inspired this legislation.

Mr. Chairman, the THRIVE Act would save American lives, as well as taxpayer funds in the long run, by helping more individuals rise above addiction and poverty.

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

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

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of my manager's amendment to the legislation at issue today, H.R. 5735, the THRIVE Act, which, again, would make supportive housing more accessible to those most in need by allocating a limited number of housing choice vouchers to nonprofits that provide housing, workforce development, job placement, and continued addiction recovery support for individuals who are transitioning out of rehab and back into the workforce.

This manager's amendment introduces improvements to the THRIVE Act based on feedback we have received from various stakeholders in the affordable housing and recovery communities, my colleagues on the House Financial Services Committee, as well as technical drafting assistance from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

Among these changes include:

Clarifying the distinction between illicit drug use and medication- assisted treatment;

Requiring nonprofits to show that they have experience administering housing programs and are in full compliance with the Fair Housing Act and Civil Rights Act of 1964;

Requiring HUD and eligible entities to coordinate with the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Labor, and local workforce development boards;

Eliminating time limits for individuals in the program;

Authorizing waiver authority allowing HUD greater flexibility to administer the program, while still requiring full compliance with statutes and regulations related to fair housing nondiscrimination, labor standards, and other requirements; and other technical changes.

Mr. Chair, I would like to thank my Democratic colleagues, including Congresswoman Sinema, for suggesting several of the improvements to the bill that are included in this amendment. I would also like to emphasize, once again, my commitment to working with Ms. Sinema and other colleagues to request additional funding from the Appropriations Committee to support this demonstration program.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that the total economic burden of prescription opioid misuse alone in the United States is $78.5 billion per year. Our Federal housing programs are an underutilized

source in the fight against this national public health crisis.

The THRIVE Act is a small investment of only 10,000 housing choice vouchers out of a total of over 2 million, to people who are literally dying every day. It has earned the support of over 140 recovery organizations who are on the front lines of this epidemic.

Once again, Mr. Chairman, it is not a reason to vote against this legislation because it is using existing appropriations for the Housing Choice Voucher Program.

Our friends on the other side of the aisle who are objecting to this legislation are making the wrongheaded and misguided argument that claims that this is somehow taking away from other members of the program.

There are 198,000 vouchers that come up each and every year. We are talking about not taking vouchers away from anyone, but using those vouchers that become available for new recipients. These recipients are oftentimes eligible for the Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program anyway, because they come out of rehab without resources. They are statutorily eligible.

So when they talk about taking away from veterans, when they talk about taking away from the disabled, or from the homeless, that is who these people are. These people typically are without homes. They are, in many cases, veterans.

Saint James Apartments, which is one of these recovery centers in my district, focuses exclusively on veterans who are addicted to opioids, and these people, obviously, are also struggling with a disability. So the THRIVE Act deserves every one of our Members' support. These organizations and these folks who are struggling with addiction are literally crying out for Congress to help, and we need to answer that call.

I urge support for my manager's amendment, and the underlying legislation so we can work together in a bipartisan manner to improve housing options for individuals recovering from opioid addiction and other substance abuse disorders.

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

Mr. Chairman, just to respond briefly to some of those claims, our efforts to work in a bipartisan way, an overture to the ranking member to actually meet her halfway, should be actually welcomed. It shouldn't be rejected.

And if she is concerned about more funding, guess what, that is not what the authorizing committees do. That is what the appropriators do, and if the ranking member were sincere, she would sign on to the letter to the appropriators with respect to providing additional funds.

But in any event, this is not hastily put together. This is the result of a lot of feedback, of hearings, of many years of actually talking and listening to not-for-profits that are in this line of work. And they are begging us, along with 144 other organizations in addiction recovery, to pass this bill.

I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the manager's amendment, and the underlying bill.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to claim time in opposition to this amendment, although I do not oppose the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I want to make an observation that, in the course of this debate, not one of the Members speaking in opposition to this legislation has made the argument that these evidence-based transitional housing models won't work. None of the arguments are that this model won't work and won't help people achieve long-term recovery. So why would anyone oppose the legislation?

I will accept my friend's, the gentlewoman from Wisconsin's amendment. I appreciate the contribution that she is making to make sure that Native American Tribal communities and their Tribal housing authorities are designated as eligible entities to receive vouchers.

This amendment will ensure that Native American communities residing in Tribal areas would have the opportunity to benefit from this demonstration, similar to urban, suburban, and other rural areas, and this amendment protects persons recovering from addiction in Native American Tribal communities by ensuring that vouchers

might still be available through Tribal housing authorities should an eligible nonprofit not be available.

Because some of the Tribal areas are located in very remote areas, the nonprofit entities envisioned under this demonstration program may not have the capacity to reach onto those reservations. This amendment provides remote Tribal communities an avenue for providing transitional housing to persons recovering from addiction when such nonprofit participation could be low. This amendment ensures that Tribal communities are not disadvantaged by a lack of nonprofit access so that they have an adequate voucher dispersion entity to community individuals in need of transitional housing as they recover from addiction.

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

Mr. Chairman, in conclusion, I accept and support the gentlewoman's amendment.

I will just remind all Members, and especially Members who might be considering whether or not they want to vote for the legislation, if you are concerned about additional appropriations, the proper channel is to request that from the appropriators. Any Member of Congress considering voting on this legislation can sign this bipartisan letter to the appropriators asking for additional financial support for this demonstration project. But it is not a reason to not vote ``yes.''

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of House Resolution 934, the combined rule for my legislation, H.R. 5735, the Transitional Housing for Recovery in Viable Environments, or THRIVE, Act.

I want to thank Chairman Hensarling, Chairman Duffy, and my colleagues on the House Financial Services Committee for their support and feedback on this legislation, as well as Chairman Sessions and Ranking Member McGovern on the House Committee on Rules for their consideration of my manager's amendment to make improvements to this bill.

This week the House is considering several important pieces of legislation to address the opioid epidemic that takes the lives of 116 Americans every day. My home State of Kentucky has the third highest overdose mortality rate in the country.

In order to achieve meaningful progress in the fight against opioid addiction in our Nation, Congress can no longer simply focus on prevention, enforcement, and treatment. We must also begin to implement policies that focus on long-term recovery. Our Federal housing programs are an underutilized resource in these efforts.

The THRIVE Act would make supportive housing more accessible to those in need by allocating a limited number of Section 8 housing choice vouchers to nonprofits that provide housing, workforce development, job placement, financial literacy, and continued addiction recovery support for individuals who are transitioning out of rehab and back into the workforce.

Rather than allocating the vouchers through public housing authorities, this demonstration would give vouchers directly to housing nonprofits that meet evidence-based metrics of success on a competitive basis. The vouchers would also be distributed with a focus on regions of the country with the highest rates of opioid-related deaths.

This legislation would only allocate either 10,000 or 0.5 percent of total housing vouchers, whichever is less, to people who are literally dying every day of opioid addiction and other substance abuse disorders. The demonstration is limited to 5 years.

No one would have a voucher taken away from them to create this demonstration program. This is an important point that I would like to emphasize to my friend from Colorado, who is concerned that there might be a cannibalizing effect of existing vouchers.

An estimated 198,000 Section 8 vouchers are turned over each year and returned to HUD. It is from this amount that the demonstration would set aside only 10,000 to address a deadly national public health crisis.

The goal of this demonstration is not to take away vouchers from those who need them but, rather, to open up other housing options to people coming out of rehab who would otherwise be forced to use Section 8 vouchers to live in a housing situation where they would be surrounded by individuals who are still in active addiction.

If our goal is to help people coming out of rehab or medication- assisted treatment to stay off of opioids and gain job skills and find employment, our government programs should give people the option to live in transitional housing with housing choice vouchers.

Additionally, and I would also invite my friend from Colorado to consider this: I have made a commitment to working with my Democratic colleagues in requesting additional funds from the Appropriations Committee for the purpose of supporting this demonstration. I would invite my friend from Colorado to sign this letter requesting those additional funds, perhaps to earn his support and the support of the ranking member.

I would like to thank my Democratic colleague, Ms. Sinema, as well as the Department of Housing and Urban Development for their suggested changes that have been incorporated in the manager's amendment I offer today. I also thank Mr. Rohrabacher for his amendment that further ensures eligible entities have been effectively vetted to support recovery in local communities.

This legislation has received endorsements from over 140 housing, addiction support, and recovery organizations across the country, including Addiction Policy Forum, American Academy of Addiction Psychiatry, National Association of Social Workers, Faces and Voices of Recovery, and over 100 others on the front lines of addiction recovery.

Secretary Carson from HUD also visited my district in Kentucky earlier this year and witnessed firsthand the success of nonprofits in helping individuals rise above addiction.

I urge support for this rule so we can continue to work together in a bipartisan manner to improve housing options for individuals recovering from opioid addiction and other substance abuse disorders.

It is time for us to allow for innovation, allow for us to focus on what happens after treatment, and allow people to access transitional housing addiction recovery services that focus on work, self-esteem, financial literacy, and stable housing in order to ultimately move into a life of permanent recovery, hope, and nonsubsidized housing scenarios.