Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, we surpassed 100,000 overdose deaths this year, a 28 percent increase. The amount of fentanyl seized at our southern border--seized--is over 100 million pills and 11,000 pounds. Now, as a physician who has administered fentanyl, this is enough to kill hundreds of millions of Americans. The price of heroin is now down to $20 a dose; the price of fentanyl down to $2.

One stunning supply chain success this administration has under its belt is the fentanyl supply chain across our southern border. One place this administration has successfully fought inflation is in lowering the price of illegal opioids on our streets.

The latest effort by this administration to promote drug use is now to spend $30 million to supply clean crack-smoking pipes to addicts.

Mr. Speaker, just say no.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today with the hope that after nearly 50 years, Roe v. Wade's attack on the most basic of human rights, the right to life, will soon meet its end.

Why are we going to be marching tomorrow? We do it because we believe that every person, born and unborn, deserves a chance at life. We march to shed light on the incredible resources available to expectant mothers who find themselves in desperate situations. We march to send a message that humanity cannot sit by and quietly tolerate the deliberate ending of human life.

Mr. Speaker, I am a physician, and I have helped thousands of women deliver their babies over the course of my career. When I underwent my training, I was taught that caring for expectant mothers meant caring for two patients, not one. As you can see here, advances in ultrasound technology have reinforced that training from decades ago. Mr. Speaker, these are not blobs of tissue we are talking about. These are human beings. The science is clear: From the moment of conception, new human life enters the world with its own unique DNA, and in a matter of weeks even a heartbeat.

Mr. Speaker, we march for an end to the human tragedy of abortion, and I pray each day that we come closer to this righteous conclusion.

Madam Speaker, today the House majority will likely pass the faulty Health Appropriations bill, which eliminates the protection of the Hyde and Weldon amendments. This will happen despite polling that consistently shows nearly 60 percent of Americans oppose the use of hard-earned taxpayer dollars for abortion. And even more compelling, more than 75 percent of Americans oppose the use of their tax dollars to pay for abortions overseas.

As we all know, the Hyde amendment prevents the use of Federal tax dollars for abortions. This policy rider has withstood the test of time and enjoyed bipartisan support for 45 years, including from Senator Joe Biden.

But just as important to me, as a physician, is the Weldon amendment, which prevents healthcare providers from being compelled to participate in a medical procedure to which they hold religious or moral objections, namely abortion. Removing this protection would result in gross violations of the Constitutional rights of Americans.

Madam Speaker, the Hyde and Weldon amendments are just two examples of commonsense measures we have enacted over the years to protect life. I urge my colleagues in the majority to reconsider dismantling these important protections of the right to life.

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

Madam Speaker, I rise today to commemorate Carol Clews, a pro-life leader in Maryland who passed away from cancer this spring. Archbishop Lori, without exaggeration, called her a ``towering figure'' in the pro-life movement.

Carol's vocation was to help women in their crisis pregnancies by directing the faith-based Greater Baltimore Center for Pregnancy Concerns, where pregnant women could go for support until and after their children were born. Her pregnancy center, staffed mostly by volunteers, helped thousands of women and their children in a time of need.

When the City of Baltimore decreed that her pregnancy center had to display a poster that promoted abortion, she refused to do so and took the case to Federal district court, where she prevailed. On appeal, the Fourth Circuit upheld the important religious protections and free speech rights of pregnancy centers from attacks by pro-abortion governments that want to deny the choice of life for women during one of the most vulnerable times of their lives.

The pro-life and pregnancy center movements in Maryland will greatly miss Carol Clews and her faith and courage. The thousands of women and their children who were helped by her pregnancy centers are her legacy.

Madam Speaker, today, the House debated several bills to address the health and safety of children and newborns, including those that would ban crib bumpers and mandate stability standards for furniture that could fall on children.

Unfortunately, this body did not consider any legislation that would continue to ensure that precious taxpayer dollars are not used to fund abortions that intentionally kill babies. At a time when this protection of the unborn may be stripped from Federal funding bills for the first time in nearly 50 years, it should be pointed out that abortion ends exponentially more lives than crib bumpers or furniture.

Madam Speaker, I, therefore, ask unanimous consent that the Committees on Energy and Commerce, Ways and Means, and the Judiciary be discharged from further consideration of H.R. 18, the No Taxpayer Funding for

Abortion Act, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

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

Madam Speaker, I rise today to include in the Record an article written by David Stevenson, the Director of the Center of Energy and Environmental Policy at the Caesar Rodney Institute. This article summarizes many of the various concerns raised by multiple stakeholders with regard to current plans for offshore wind development on the United States' Outer Continental Shelf. These concerns are particularly timely in light of the Biden Administration's approval of the Vineyard Wind Offshore Wind Project off the coast of Massachusetts earlier this week.

For years I have sought to raise concerns with proposed offshore wind projects relating to commercial and recreational fisheries, navigational safety, national security, natural resources, environmental conservation and the impacts these massive projects have on local communities. Nonetheless, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management has decided to move ahead with the approval of this project without adequately accommodating these concerns. I fear that this project is a harbinger of what is to come and that in the not-so- distant future, much of our East Coast will be pocked by these large industrial projects to the detriment of all of the interests I have already mentioned.

Madam Speaker, I urge my fellow members and the Biden administration to address these issues before it is too late to ensure the responsible development of our treasured coastal and marine resources.

[From CRI News, May 4, 2021]

Offshore Wind Too Ugly for the Hamptons but OK for Other Beach Resorts?

(By David T. Stevenson, Director Center for Energy & Environmental

Policy)

Officials in New York and the Federal Government determined

that the proposed offshore wind turbine lease area off the

Hamptons is too close and ruins the serene ocean viewshed.

They also noted it is a threat to navigation, fishing, and

endangered marine mammals.

The Fairway lease areas sit as close as 12 miles off the

Long Island coast near the Hamptons.

In official comments to the US Bureau of Ocean Energy

Management (BOEM) submitted July 30, 2018, New York suggested

the wind turbines be no closer than 20 miles from shore. This

recommendation was based upon an earlier study by BOEM that

concluded that 600-foot-high turbines produced a ``dominate

impact ``on the beach view 15 miles offshore.

Adjusting for the new 50% taller turbines, the suggested

distance from the shore should be 30 miles. In Europe, the

closest lease area for these jumbo turbines is 44 miles out.

The New York decision begs the question of why lease areas

from Maryland to Massachusetts aren't being rejected on the

same merits.

There are four proposed lease areas within 20 miles of the

islands of Martha's Vineyard, Nantucket, and Block Island.

Another four lease areas are off southern New Jersey,

Delaware, and Ocean City, Maryland, which range between 10

and 13 miles off major beach resorts.

Yet BOEM is about to approve the ``Vineyard Wind'' project

just 14 miles from shore, establishing a precedent likely to

influence federal decisions on all the other projects.

Visibility is a small part of New York's concerns. The

State's extensive outreach revealed proposed lease areas

posed a great concern to a high number of commercial and for-

hire fishermen.

The passage around or between wind farms could pose a

safety risk for vessels attempting to maintain a course

heading and could increase vessel costs, especially for the

fishing industry facing daily hazards and a potential loss of

fishing gear.

The BOEM Final Environmental Impact Statement for the

``Vineyard Wind'' project concluded that the leases would

have a major impact on Coast Guard Search and Rescue

Operations.

They also determined a major negative impact on scientific

studies used to determine the annual fishing limits for

various species. Both impacts relate to the need to fly

higher to find people in need of rescue and to make fish

counts.

There are other potential environmental impacts.

There are only 356 endangered Northern Right Whales left,

and they regularly visit many of the proposed lease areas.

Recent accidental deaths were caused by vessel strikes,

entanglements, and ocean noise, all of which will be worsened

by offshore wind projects.

Horseshoe crab blood is the only known substance for

testing antigens in vaccine development. The COVID-19 vaccine

could not have been developed without it. The blood is

harvested, and the crabs are returned to the sea. The crabs

burrow into the sandy seafloor to hibernate for the winter,

primarily in a federal reserve off the New Jersey, Delaware,

and Maryland coast.

Offshore wind projects, with acres of cement and rocks to

prevent sand scouring, would land on top of the reserve, and

electric cables and turbines will create noise and

electromagnetic fields with an unknown impact on the crabs.

The crab's eggs are critical food for migrating birds like

the endangered Red Knot.

The problems discussed above are common to the eight lease

areas located too close to shore.

The Hamptons have some of the most expensive beachfront

home values in the country. Many of those homes are owned by

wealthy Manhattanites. One can only wonder how much influence

these wealthy folks had on the decision to shut down the

Fairways lease areas.

What's good enough for New Yorkers should be good enough

for the rest of the East Coast.

Mr. Speaker, today I rise to honor the life and sacrifice of Corporal Keith Heacook, a police officer whose funeral I attended on Monday. He was tragically killed in a violent assault while responding to an early morning domestic disturbance call. As a member of the Delmar Police Department, a police force that straddles the Maryland- Delaware border, Corporal Heacook honorably and selflessly served not just my district, but also the constituents of southern Delaware.

Mr. Speaker, it was appropriate that a man who laid down his life in service to his community was given such a fitting funeral with over 1,000 law enforcement officers paying their final respects.

Coincidentally, this week, we honor the courage and sacrifice of all our men and women in blue nationwide--men and women who literally put their lives on the line every day so that we can live safely in our homes and in our communities. Corporal Heacook leaves behind a widow and a young son.

Mr. Speaker, I ask everyone to join me in praying for his family during this challenging time and for all the families of all the brave men and women who have laid down their lives to protect us.

Mr. Speaker, I guess it is appropriate for someone from Maryland to speak on this issue because this is Maryland's land we are talking about. This land was given for the purpose of a Federal enclave by Maryland. How dare Congress take Maryland's land from it. That is not why it was given.

Mr. Speaker, let's talk about the unconstitutionality--well, you have heard about the unconstitutionality. We don't need to talk about it any more.

I urge everyone who is watching us on C-SPAN today: Go get your copy of the Constitution. It is written in black and white. This is very plain. This is clearly unconstitutional.

Mr. Speaker, I hope America was paying attention to the majority leader's speech, that one line where he said ``this is all about politics.'' In fact, he even gave the history. He said, well, in the past, the Republicans wanted Senators, and so and so wanted Senators.

We don't live in the past. We live in the present.

Mr. Speaker, is this what America wants? Do they want pure politics?

Not my words. That's what the majority leader said: This is all about politics.

Mr. Speaker, let's ask: Why did our Founders do what they did?

Every American who is watching, think about what you saw last summer. You saw a White House under siege. You saw a mob. And we know Members of this House have promoted mobs. They did it last weekend. It will happen again. If we put the boundary next to the Federal buildings, it will be subject to a mob, a mob controlled by a State, not a Federal enclave.

That is the last thing this country needs, and it is the last thing the Federal Government needs.

I see my colleagues on the other side of the aisle shaking their heads.

How else would one describe that group outside the White House?

It was an uncontrolled mob. Thank God that Federal troops, Federal forces, Federal law enforcement were allowed to be there to stop that mob.

That is why we need the District of Columbia to be the Federal enclave.

Mr. Speaker, I oppose the bill.

Mr. Speaker, I move that the gentleman's words be taken down.

Mr. Speaker, I oppose the ruling of the Chair.

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

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

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

Madam Speaker, this bill, the Equality Act, is nothing more than an identity politic sellout, a thinly veiled attempt to attack and coerce individuals who hold serious and legitimate concerns or objections to things like parental rights to make healthcare decisions for their children; the ability of women to compete on an equal athletic playing field; and even medical procedures like sterilization and abortion.

I am a physician and I have been practicing medicine for over 35 years. This bill, if enacted, would mandate that healthcare practitioners and even facilities like Catholic hospitals would be forced to provide and participate in procedures like abortion, which ends a human life.

We should all be able to agree that a Catholic hospital should never be compelled by the government to offer procedures like abortion that they morally object to in the strongest possible terms.

Furthermore, if society continues to support politically correct gender identity politics, the science is becoming clearer that gender dysphoria, especially in children, is a psychiatric condition that in most cases will resolve itself with time.

Instead, however, this bill would require parents to allow irreversible medical interventions for their children, children who may even be prepubescent, resulting in sterilization, and oftentimes later regret.

Scientific data confirms that many who undergo gender transition continue to deal with serious depression, even after full transition. And the poorly named ``Equality Act'' would mandate that medical professionals accept and support the desire of their patients to undergo these invasive procedures, even if they have professional or conscience objections.

Madam Speaker, in response, I will be reintroducing the Conscience Protection Act this week. My bill will protect healthcare providers from being required to perform abortions or sterilizations and allow them to continue practicing medicine without duress or coercion from their employer or perhaps even their patients.

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to cosponsor my bill, and I oppose the so-called Equality Act on the floor this week.

Madam Speaker, I regret to inform you that I was unable to vote on January 13, 2021, due to an unavoidable conflict. Had I been present, I would have voted NO on Roll Call No. 17.