Floor Statements

Mr. Chair, I would like to thank Chairman McKeon and the Members of the House Armed Services Committee for the Committee's work on the Fiscal Year 2015 National Defense Authorization Act. I support the final bill; it is crafted thoughtfully and carefully to reflect the needs of the warfighter while enjoying bipartisan support from this body. Its passage is a testament to the Committee's leadership and hard work to support our men and women in uniform.

I am particularly thankful for the support of the United States Navy's ``unfunded priority'' request of additional EA-18G Growlers. Early in the budget cycle, following the release of the Administration's Department of Defense budget, the Navy Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) Admiral Jonathan Greenert testified that there is a growing demand for electronic attack capabilities. Specifically, he requested 22 additional EA-18G Growlers above the President's Budget request to meet that demand.

The EA-18G Growler provides the Navy and all Department of Defense forces with the ability to control the entire electromagnetic spectrum, the only aircraft in the entire inventory with that capability. With warfare increasingly operating within the cyber, information and electronic domains, there is increasing importance in not just understanding, but dominating the electromagnetic spectrum. For this reason, CNO Greenert testified why he believes that the Growler is essential to the warfighter. From the Committee's work, we also understand that the Navy is undertaking further analysis this year to determine the final requirement for the airborne electronic attack (AEA) capability.

Without additional aircraft, the EA-18G Growler manufacturing line is likely to be shuttered before the Navy can fulfill its requirements for additional electronic attack. If this scenario is allowed to occur, the Department of Defense would also lose its ability to produce F/A-18E/F Super Hornet strike fighters, which are manufactured alongside the Growler in the same production line. Such a loss would affect our Nation's ability to surge strike fighters, meet increasing demand in electronic warfare, and provide competition in tactical aviation. The Growler program has been a model defense acquisition program, meeting all of its cost targets and delivering ahead of the Navy's schedule deadlines. Moreover, the F/A-18 and EA-18G production lines support 60,000 jobs, including 13,000 jobs in my home state of Missouri.

I am pleased that the Committee included support for 5 EA-18G Growlers above the President's Budget Request. While this overall increase will not meet the Navy's total unfunded priority, it demonstrates the Committee's position that the Growler is an essential resource that our Nation requires. Further, the Committee urged the Navy to take steps to keep the manufacturing line solvent until the Department can meet the basic needs of the warfighter in electronic attack. I will continue my work with the House Appropriations Committee to ensure that the Navy receives a sufficient number of Growlers to meet its emerging requirements and keep the manufacturing line open throughout Fiscal Year 2015.

My voice is not alone in trying to support the Navy unfunded priority for additional Growlers. The request has strong support across Congress, as evidenced by a letter circulated earlier in the year that collected 109 House signatures in support of the Growler. This is a strong showing for any program, and one that received significant bipartisan validation. That letter is attached at the conclusion of my remarks.

In closing, the Nation faces many challenges as we send our sons and daughters into harm's way to defend our freedom and liberty. The Committee's bill is always a statement about its judgment on how best to serve those warfighters. I am glad that they have made EA-18G Growlers a high priority, and I look forward to working with them over the course of Fiscal Year 2015.

Additionally, I have included a support letter for the EA-18G Growler that I authored with Representative Lacy Clay that is signed by 109 Members of Congress.

Congress of the United States,

Washington, DC, April 11, 2014.

Hon. Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon,

Chairman, House Armed Services Committee, Washington, DC.

Hon. Adam Smith,

Ranking Member, House Armed Services Committee, Washington,

Mr. Chairman and Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 3530, the Justice for Victims of Trafficking Act.

H.R. 3530 is a comprehensive, multipronged approach to address the problem of human trafficking in the United States. The sponsor of this legislation, Congressman Ted Poe, is a friend, colleague, and kindred spirit to me on the issue of human trafficking. As a former judge, Congressman Poe has drawn from his experience on the bench to craft a bill that would provide support and aid to victims of trafficking, as well as training for law enforcement and other first responders.

Madam Speaker, H.R. 3530 is one of the most comprehensive and inclusive human trafficking bills proposed to date. H.R. 3530 provides grants to help State and local governments offer services to victims in order to give the survivors of human trafficking the sanctuary and counseling they so desperately need after suffering through and surviving this brutal crime.

Perhaps most importantly, H.R. 3530 addresses the demand side of human trafficking by clarifying that buyers should be prosecuted along with pimps. Madam Speaker, for too long those who patronize child prostitutes have been overlooked. H.R. 3530 encourages law enforcement to target and punish persons who purchase elicit sexual activities from trafficking victims not as petty criminals but as serious offenders, the serious offenders that they are.

For these reasons and others, Madam Speaker, I support H.R. 3530, the Justice for Victims of Trafficking Act.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for yielding me time.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 3610, the Stop Exploitation Through Trafficking Act. Congressman Erik Paulsen authored this important legislation in order to encourage States to adopt laws that treat trafficked minors as victims, not as criminals.

Madam Speaker, there is no such thing as a child prostitute. Minor participants should be considered victims of these heinous crimes and abuse, rather than criminals themselves. They are frequently coerced into prostituting themselves through a variety of methods, including physical and psychological manipulation.

Madam Speaker, these children have gone through a nightmare that we cannot even imagine. Their suffering should be at an end once they are under the protection of law enforcement. However, in many cases, these victims are treated as criminals or delinquents, which results in further traumatization.

Madam Speaker, the law should protect child victims of prostitution and punish the abusers. The law should define these sexually exploited children as victims of abuse and help them find the protection and support they need to begin to heal.

Madam Speaker, I support H.R. 3610 because it encourages States to enact safe harbor legislation aimed at ensuring that these children are treated as victims, not criminals, and are directed to support services, not detention facilities.

I thank the gentleman from Virginia, Chairman Goodlatte, for his wonderful leadership on this issue and so many others.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of my bill, H.R. 4225, the Stop Advertising Victims of Exploitation, SAVE, Act. But, Madam Speaker, I also rise today in support of all the good work done by my colleagues here in Congress on the issue of human trafficking.

Madam Speaker, as a former United States Ambassador, I was exposed firsthand to the horrors of human trafficking on an international level. I reported on the devastating consequences of human trafficking, where innocent women and children were dragged into the dark abyss of sex slavery. But never in my darkest moments did I ever think that human trafficking was so rampant right here in the United States of America.

Madam Speaker, the faces behind me are photographs of actual victims of sex trafficking. These young women and children were forced into sexual slavery by ruthless traffickers. Madam Speaker, right now there are young women being forced into prostitution in virtually every district across the Nation. In fact, I was shocked to learn that my own hometown of St. Louis, Missouri, has been identified as one of the top 20 areas for sex trafficking in the United States.

Madam Speaker, this problem is hiding, hiding in plain sight. However, there is hope. I take hope from the work done by the law enforcement professionals who are on the front lines every single day, protecting our Nation's children from those who would seek to exploit them; I take hope from those who work in victims' services and their tireless efforts to help survivors recover, heal, and forge new lives out of the horrors of sexual enslavement; but most importantly, I take hope from all the survivors of this hideous crime. Their strength gives us strength; their resolve gives us inspiration; and their steadfast commitment to ending sex trafficking gives us the courage to fight.

Madam Speaker, because of the efforts of many individuals and groups, I am happy to report that Congress has taken notice of this serious problem. Years of work by Representatives Smith, Poe, and Paulsen, and my cochair of the Human Trafficking Task Force, Congresswoman Maloney, among the so many others who have raised awareness of this issue, have laid the foundation for the long overdue action for Congress that they are presently taking.

I am grateful that many of my colleagues have held events in their home districts to raise awareness and education of this crime. Representatives Davis, Hudson, Roskam, Coffman, Huizenga, and Heck, along with so very many others, have all held human trafficking events in their districts to raise awareness and offer solutions to end sexual assault and human trafficking. I applaud these efforts and look forward to continuing this work for years to come.

However, Madam Speaker, there is much work to be done. As legislators, we have an obligation to come together and do something because we can, because we should, and because we must.

Over the last 10 years, prostitution has slowly but persistently migrated to an online marketplace. Classified services, like backpage.com and others, are the vehicles for advertising the victims of the child sex trade to the world. Pimps and traffickers blatantly advertise their victims' sexual services, with provocative photographs and unsubtle messages, complete with per-hour pricing. The traffickers pay Web sites like Backpage to display their messages. These Web sites reportedly reap enormous profits at the expense of the victims of sex trafficking. Revenue from U.S. online prostitution advertising totaled $45 million just in the year 2013. Many of these ads feature children and trafficking victims. This results in thousands of children every year being openly sold for sex on the Internet.

Madam Speaker, government intervention is necessary to end facilitation of sex trafficking by Web sites like Backpage and others who commercially advertise this criminal activity. Companies that base their business models off of the profits made by selling sex with children should not be allowed to operate. The SAVE Act seeks

to criminalize this behavior, thereby dramatically reducing the victimization of vulnerable children and women forced into sexual slavery in the U.S.

The protections included in the SAVE Act apply to two classes of victims: underage children and those who are being forced to engage in commercial sex acts against their will. The offense created by the SAVE Act applies to any form of advertisement. Online postings, newspaper classifieds, even billboards would be considered unlawful if the advertiser knew it would lead to sex trafficking.

Madam Speaker, there is well-established precedent for Congress to criminalize the advertising of illegal goods or services, including the advertisement of child pornography, weapons of mass destruction, illegal narcotics, and animal fighting. Surely--surely--advertisements offering sex with children should also be subject to the same restrictions. The penalties are 15 years to life if the victim, the child victim, is younger than 14 years old, 10 years to life if the child victim is 14 to 18 years old.

The advertisement of victims is the key link in the human trafficking chain. Businesses make millions of dollars every month connecting johns with pimps and their victims. This link needs to be broken. Criminalizing the advertisement of trafficking victims will stem the flow of money, resulting in a reduction of both demand and supply.

The victims of sex trafficking are not nameless, faceless children. They are our daughters, granddaughters, nieces, and neighbors. They are the vulnerable youth of our society, the ones who should be protected the most, not exploited for money and greed.

I urge my colleagues to support the SAVE Act because it will provide the tools necessary for law enforcement to combat the sexual exploitation and enslavement of women and children in the United States.

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

Madam Speaker, I thank the chairman for his leadership in this.

I rise today, Madam Speaker, in support of H.R. 4573, the International Megan's Law to Prevent Demand for Child Sex Trafficking.

My very good friend, Congressman Chris Smith, a champion on all issues around human rights, antitrafficking, and taking care of the most vulnerable, has introduced this important legislation to protect children at home and abroad from the scourge of sex trafficking.

H.R. 4573 will provide advance notice of foreign travel by registered sex offenders to the government of the destination country.

Madam Speaker, this notice would allow the foreign government to identify and scrutinize the sex offenders' activity, ensuring that they do not engage in the ghastly practice of sex tourism.

Sex offenders often plan their trips by seeking out the locations where the most vulnerable children can be found, many times in countries where law enforcement is unable to effectively guard against the problem. Madam Speaker, sex offenders should not be allowed to use the anonymity provided by foreign travel to help hide their hideous crimes.

The U.S. should take a leading role as a global defender of children from sexual abuse. This is why I support H.R. 4573, because it will give governments the information they need to prevent sexual offenders from taking advantage of gaps in law enforcement.

I thank the chairman.

Mr. Speaker, today I rise in honor of a great American hero.

On October 13, 2010, Missouri's Second District lost a fearless young man when Lance Corporal Phillip Vinnedge made the ultimate sacrifice for his country while serving valiantly during Operation Enduring Freedom in Helmand province, Afghanistan.

Phillip first decided to join the military at the age of 10 after witnessing the tragic events of September 11, and after graduating from Francis Howell Central High School in 2009, Phillip enlisted in the United States Marine Corps.

To those who knew Phillip, his devotion to his country through service and sacrifice came as no surprise. He was always determined to protect family and friends and was a respected leader of humble, quiet, and kind nature who never sought accolades or recognition for his accomplishments. At the end of the day, he was happy just reaching his own personal goals while serving and protecting the country that he loved.

In addition to his military service, Phillip was an outstanding person. He always sought exciting adventures and new opportunities, from being a Boy Scout, an Order of the Arrow member, a member of the trap shooting club, a wrestler, a welder, and a skydiver among many other great things. There was no challenge that Phillip would back down from. It is for these fearless and courageous servants like Phillip that we are able to know we are protected and allowed to enjoy freedom and liberty here at home.

Phillip will be greatly missed by all who knew him, but most of all by his family: his parents, David and Julie Vinnedge; and his brothers, Corey and Jason.

However, despite their grief, the Vinnedges continue to work hard to honor the memory of Phillip. Phillip had always wanted to buy and restore an old 1950s pickup truck. Since he never had the chance, his parents bought a 1951 Chevy and dedicated it to their son and other fallen marines. The images of the truck resemble events from Phillip's life and ideas that were important to him. Julie and David Vinnedge now use the truck to promote charities such as Toys for Tots, the Missouri Military Memorial Foundation, and the Tragedy Assistance Program for Survivors.

The United States of America owes Lance Corporal Phillip Vinnedge a priceless debt that we will never be able to fully repay. Therefore, the least I can do as a Representative of the United States Congress, it is my honor to sponsor H.R. 2391, a bill that names the Cottleville Post Office after such a genuine, honest, and great young man and by immortalizing a hero who gave up his life serving a Nation he absolutely loved. I am proud that this legislation will allow the inspiring story of Phillip to continue to be told in Missouri's Second District for a long, long time to come.

I thank the gentlewoman for yielding and for hosting this Special Order. There is no greater defender or champion for faith or family or freedom than Congresswoman Vicky Hartzler.

Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight to protect the conscience of the American people. Since taking office in January of last year, I have heard from countless constituents on how the government is abusing their individual freedoms under ObamaCare over and over again.

I recently heard from my constituent, George, a seminarian from St. Louis County, about the administration's mandate. He notes that what the administration is asking Catholic hospitals and nonprofits to do is in direct opposition to our Catholic beliefs. He writes to me:

Mrs. Wagner, I ask you to please stand up for us. We are

being persecuted and unjustly forced to comply with

procedures that are in conflict with our own beliefs.

As George articulated, the United States Federal Government is currently discriminating against its citizens of faith in this country.

One of this country's founding principles is the freedom to worship without interference by the Federal Government. Our forefathers did not flee from oppressive nations, build a country on liberties, and emblaze them in the Bill of Rights just for this administration to trample on them over and over again.

Yet the rule issued by the administration under ObamaCare does just that. This administration now mandates that religious nonprofits and businesses must provide health care benefits that go against their fundamental beliefs. If businesses and nonprofits do not comply with this mandate, they are penalized with crippling fines that the gentlewoman from Missouri has talked about. These fines can go up to $100 per day per employee. This means that if a business decides to provide health care but does not comply with the mandate, they can owe up to $36,500 for one employee for the year. This is in comparison to the $2,000 they could owe for not providing any health insurance--any health insurance--for that same employee at all.

Mr. Speaker, not only does this not make any sense, it is discrimination by the Federal Government and it is wrong. This mandate puts the jobs, the livelihoods, and the health care of millions of Americans at risk. It forces those who stand up for their conscience to choose between paying detrimental fines that could shut down their business or dropping health care coverage, as has been discussed before, completely for their employees altogether.

Mr. Speaker, I ask you: Should the Federal Government be allowed to tell the St. Louis Post-Dispatch what they can and cannot print? Should the Federal Government tell my neighbors in Ballwin, Missouri, what they can and cannot say about their government leaders? Should the Federal Government tell George, the seminarian from St. Louis County, what he can and cannot preach?

Mr. Speaker, while in many parts of the world authoritarian governments control the press, prohibit freedom of speech, and only allow for certain beliefs, that cannot be the case in the United States of America. We will not, I believe, stand by and watch this administration strip away our freedoms. I will continue to fight on behalf of the constituents of Missouri and all the American people to keep this the land of the free.

Mr. Speaker, on Thursday, March 13, 2014 I was unable to be in Washington, D.C. and vote on the legislative business of the day.

On Ordering the Previous Question for consideration of H. Res. 515, a resolution providing for consideration of both H.R. 3189, Water Rights Protection Act and H.R. 4015, SGR Repeal and Medicare Provider Payment Modernization Act of 2014, rollcall vote No. 125, had I been present I would have voted ``yes.''

On Adoption of H. Res. 515, a resolution providing for consideration of both H.R. 3189, Water Rights Protection Act and H.R. 4015, SGR Repeal and Medicare Provider Payment Modernization Act of 2014, rollcall vote No. 126, had I been present I would have voted ``yes.''

On Agreeing to the Ellison of Minnesota Amendment No. 1 to H.R. 3973, Faithful Execution of the Law Act of 2014, rollcall vote No. 127, had I been present I would have voted ``no.''

On the Motion to Recommit with Instructions H.R. 3973, Faithful Execution of the Law Act of 2014, rollcall vote No. 128, had I been present I would have voted ``no.''

On Passage of H.R. 3973, Faithful Execution of the Law Act of 2014, rollcall vote No. 129, had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

On Agreeing to the Polis of Colorado Substitute Amendment No. 3 to H.R. 3189, Water Rights Protection Act, rollcall vote No. 130, had I been present I would have voted ``no.''

On the Motion to Recommit with Instructions H.R. 3189, Water Rights Protection Act, rollcall vote No. 131, had I been present I would have voted ``no.''

On Passage of H.R. 3189, Water Rights Protection Act, rollcall vote No. 132, had I been present I would have voted ``yes.''

On the Motion to Table the Question of the Privileges of the House, rollcall vote No. 133, had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the ENFORCE Act.

When crafting the timeless document that is our Constitution, the Founding Fathers emphasized the need to prevent the emergence of an imperial monarch. In their wisdom, they gave Congress the power to make laws and tasked the President with the responsibility to enforce those laws--not just the laws he agrees with or the laws that are politically convenient, but every law.

Mr. Speaker, President Obama has not lived up to this responsibility. By picking and choosing which laws are worthy of enforcement, this administration is undermining the very foundation of our representative democracy.

The ENFORCE Act seeks to restore the balance of powers that the Framers of our Constitution envisioned. The Constitution grants Congress--not the President--the power to make the laws. Mr. Speaker, this is why I support the ENFORCE Act, to provide Congress with the ability to push back against the Obama administration's executive overreach.

Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 93 I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Stated against:

Mr. Chair, I want to thank the chairman for yielding me time. I particularly want to thank the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Duffy) for his leadership on this important issue and for standing up on behalf of hardworking American families.

I rise today in support of H.R. 3193 and urge its passage by this House.

The Financial Services Committee has, on multiple occasions, asked the question ``Who protects consumers from the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection?''

Unfortunately, the answer for the last 3\1/2\ years has been nobody. Today, this House has an opportunity to change that.

The underlying bill includes a number of provisions to ensure that the very basic principles of good government apply to the Bureau, and it puts an end to the special treatment granted to the Bureau under Dodd-Frank.

These are commonsense, pro-consumer provisions that will help protect hardworking American families and taxpayers from yet another Washington bureaucracy that thinks it knows what is in their best interest.

I urge the passage of this bill.

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I thank Congressman Chris Smith for his leadership in protecting the rights of the unborn.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of life. I believe in the sanctity of life, that life begins at conception, and that life is truly our greatest gift. I also recognize that abortion can be a very divisive issue. However, there is an area where most Americans agree and where elected officials can come together, and that is on the Federal funding of abortion.

Recent polling and information confirms what we have always known, that the majority of Americans do not want their hard-earned tax dollars going to pay for abortions. And Congress has consistently worked together over the years by attaching the Hyde amendment to appropriations bills to prevent taxpayer funds from going towards abortions.

Today the House will vote on a bill that I am proud to cosponsor and support, H.R. 7, the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act. This bill does exactly what the name implies: it permanently ensures that no taxpayer dollars go to pay for abortions or abortion coverage. This bill codifies the Hyde amendment as well as addresses taxpayer funding that, unfortunately, the Hyde amendment does not cover.

For example, ObamaCare expressly allows funding for plans that include abortions through taxpayer subsidies. During the health care debate, the President assured the American people that no Federal dollars would be used to fund abortions under ObamaCare. Yet this was just one more in a long line of inaccurate statements on ObamaCare by the President and his administration.

The No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act not only prevents taxpayer funding for abortion under ObamaCare, but it also requires transparency to ensure consumers are fully informed about which plans on the exchanges contain abortion coverage and surcharges.

Madam Speaker, throughout my life, I have worked hard to draw attention to the pro-life movement. I do it with love and compassion. I live for the day when abortion is not just illegal, but it is unthinkable.

Thank you very much. I thank the gentleman for yielding and for organizing this Special Order. There is no greater defender of the unborn than Representative Chris Smith of New Jersey, and I thank you

for all that you do every single day for all of us.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of life. One week from today, sadly, is the 41st anniversary of the Supreme Court decision that made abortion legal in this country in ROE v. WADE. Even though the House will not be in session next week, I will be here to join many of my constituents as we march on the Mall. The first time that I marched on the Mall in support of the unborn, I was a 28-year-old pregnant mother pregnant with my second son, Stephen. I will be honored to march again in the Mall in memory this time, sadly, of the 56 million abortions that have taken place since that dreadful day 41 years ago.

That is roughly one-fifth of the United States population whom we will never know. We will never derive the contributions to society that these nameless angels could have brought to the world. Even worse is the emotional and the physical pain that millions of women have endured in the days, months, and years after their abortion.

Forty-one years after ROE v. WADE, I am heartbroken for the pain this decision has caused over the years; but I am also hopeful and I am inspired, inspired by the many young people who energized this movement who will join us next week on the Mall in Washington, D.C., whom I will be very pleased to host and to lift up. I am energized that this movement will have these young people standing beside me, and I stand beside them next week when we march, and together we will continue to work towards the day when abortion is not only illegal but it is unthinkable.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the sponsor of this legislation, Mr. Womack of Arkansas, as well as my Democrat colleagues, Mr. Himes of Connecticut and Mr. Delaney of Maryland, for their work on this important issue. I also want to thank the chairman of the subcommittee for his very hard work in getting this bill to the floor today.

Mr. Speaker, the JOBS Act was a big win for the American economy. Since the law was passed a year and a half ago, a number of American businesses, including more than 40 biotechnology companies, as well as companies such as Kayak and Twitter, have gone public using provisions of the JOBS Act.

Additionally, dozens of community banks across the country have already taken advantage of the updated SEC registration thresholds which made up title VI of the JOBS Act.

Perhaps most encouraging is the frenzy of activity we have been seeing from entrepreneurs around the country, whether it is small technology startups lining up at the gate to begin crowdfunding or small businesses being able to share their story with more investors, now that they are allowed to advertise. We certainly see this kind of activity in the greater St. Louis region, which has become a major hub of innovation.

This is exactly what the JOBS Act was intended to do: allow entrepreneurs and small businesses to focus on innovating and creating jobs, not only complying with outdated government regulations.

Unfortunately, as we all know, Washington tends to move a little slower than the private sector, which is why this legislation is necessary. Title VI of the JOBS Act updates outdated SEC registration thresholds for community banks, and it will allow banks to focus more time on serving their customers than on complying with unnecessary red tape. And while Congress intended to include savings and loans as a part of these new registration thresholds, the SEC, to date, has not interpreted the law in this way.

Savings and loans perform essentially the same function as banks. They are overseen by the same regulators and are a pillar of many small towns and communities across this country.

Missouri is home to about 20 savings and loans that could one day benefit from the provisions in title VI. Many of them have under $200 million in assets and are located in rural areas that rely on their savings and loans for credit. Increasing the ability of these institutions to lend will help increase economic activity in Missouri and all around our great country.

In order to put savings and loans on equal footing with community banks and to codify congressional intent, today we are considering H.R. 801, which will extend the updated threshold in the JOBS Act to savings and loans. I am pleased to be a cosponsor of this legislation, because Congress must continue to take steps, no matter how incremental, to increase lending and investment in our economy.

As an added bonus, this legislation comes to the floor today with strong bipartisan support, and I want to again thank my colleagues on both sides of the aisle for their work and their support on this issue, Mr. Speaker.

I urge passage of the bill.

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 materials on the subject of my Special Order.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Health Exchange Security and Transparency Act, a bill that forces the Federal Government to notify individuals if their personal information has been stolen or unlawfully accessed through an ObamaCare exchange.

Since the disastrous rollout of ObamaCare on October 1, we have heard story after story, Mr. Speaker, of security threats and privacy concerns with the troubled ObamaCare insurance exchanges, from the chief information officer at CMS claiming that ``there is also no confidence that personable identifiable information will be protected,'' to an administrator at CMS saying that the ObamaCare Web site ``exposed a level of uncertainty that can be deemed as high risk,'' to a computer security expert calling the ObamaCare Web site ``a hacker's dream.''

It is clear that the ObamaCare exchanges were never ready to be launched, and it is unconscionable that this administration would expose millions of Americans' personal information to cyber threats and identity theft.

To make matters worse, there are laws already implemented that require private companies to notify innocent victims of these security breaches. But President Obama didn't think it was necessary to live by the same rules as the private sector and decided to push his failed agenda despite senior government officials warning him that his Web site was not safe for the American people.

Every day, Mr. Speaker, I hear from far too many hardworking families in Missouri's Second District who have seen their premiums skyrocket, wages decreased, insurance coverage canceled of late, and hours cut back at work. These families are already suffering from the harsh realities of ObamaCare. To make matters worse, they have no idea whether their personal information has been stolen or not.

Just recently, Mary Ann Schaeffer wrote to me from Kirkwood, Missouri, about how worried she is that her most intimate information could be stolen from the ObamaCare exchanges. And I quote from Mary Ann Schaeffer of Kirkwood, Missouri: ``I am concerned about the security of my sensitive medical records in a big government database.'' Mary Ann is just one of the many people I hear from in the St. Louis region that are worried about the devastating consequences of ObamaCare.

The only way to truly protect the American people from ObamaCare is by replacing it with free market-based solutions that expand access without destroying our economy, putting the Federal Government between you and your doctor, and lowering the quality of our care. The Federal Government, Mr. Speaker, should, at the very least, be required to report any security breaches on the ObamaCare Web site to those innocent victims who, through no fault of their own, trusted a government that deceived them.

Since President Obama decided to delay the implementation of ObamaCare for unions and businesses for an entire year, don't you think the least he could do is tell hardworking Americans if their personal information has been stolen or breached?

Mr. Speaker, the simple truth is: ObamaCare is wrong for the American people, it is wrong for hardworking Missourians, and it is wrong for the people of Missouri's Second Congressional District, and it needs to be replaced immediately before any more of its harmful provisions are implemented.

I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes,'' a resounding ``yes,'' on this commonsense measure.

I would now, Mr. Speaker, yield to my good friend, the gentlelady from Tennessee, Representative Diane Black, who has not only spent countless hours championing the Health Exchange Security and Transparency Act, but who has tirelessly worked to improve our Nation's health care as a small business woman and a nurse in Tennessee and now as a Member of Congress.

I thank the gentlelady from Tennessee, Representative Diane Black, for her supreme leadership in this area. This is her bill. This is her piece of legislation. It has been something she has worked on tirelessly for years and has seen its exposure in both the private sector and now, unfortunately, at the Federal Government level. So I thank her for her leadership.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield to my good friend, Representative Richard Hudson. I thank him very much. He is a freshman Member and a dear friend and colleague, a leader in our freshman class. I thank him, not only for his work on the Homeland Security and Agriculture Committees, but also for the work that he has done in dealing with health care on the Education and the Workforce Committee.

It is now my pleasure to yield to the gentleman from North Carolina, Mr. Richard Hudson.

I thank the gentleman from North Carolina, Representative Richard Hudson, for his leadership in this area and for giving voice to not just the Health Exchange Security and Transparency Act but to the jobs issue. Certainly, what ObamaCare has done is create nothing but a part-time workforce. This is about access to care. It is about cost. It is about millions of Americans who have lost their coverage. It is about the deception of the American people. It is about a government bureaucracy--a Federal bureaucracy--telling the American people what is in their best interest.

You, the American people--your constituents, Congressman Hudson--know

what is in their best interests when it comes to their health care and their most intimate details, whether it has to do with their personal medical records and information or whether it has to do with their costs, their coverage, their premiums, their copays. There is so much that must be repealed and replaced in this law. At the very least, what the Federal Government can do is to protect the integrity of their most private and personal information.

I thank the gentleman from North Carolina.

It is now my great privilege to yield to my good friend, Representative James Lankford from Oklahoma. He is our leader and our chairman on the Republican Policy Committee, and he is a friend and a colleague at the leadership table. I thank him most especially for the work that he does on the Oversight and Government Reform Committee, which is, Mr. Speaker, monitoring the implementation of healthcare.gov and of the Affordable Care Act.

I am now pleased to yield to the gentleman from Oklahoma, Mr. James Lankford.

I appreciate the comments of the gentleman from Oklahoma, who is a good friend and leader.

We won't debate the outcome of the Cotton Bowl here in the well of the floor today--that will stand on its own merit--but I do appreciate his leadership on this very important health care issue. I appreciate his leadership on the Republican Policy Committee for our party and the work that he does tirelessly to communicate those in a way that is about serving the people, which is, at the end of the day, why we are here.

Government should be here to serve the people, and we have not put the proper protections in place. What is good enough for the private sector and the States ought to be more than good enough for the Federal Government. Certainly, the American people are worthy of these kinds of protections.

While I will say over and over again that ObamaCare is wrong for the American people--that it is wrong for hardworking Missourians and that it is certainly wrong for the people of the Second District--and that it needs to be replaced immediately before any more harmful provisions are implemented, at the very least, what the government can do is require that we report any security breaches on the ObamaCare Web site to these innocent victims who, through no fault of their own, trusted a government that has once again potentially deceived them.

So, Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues again to vote ``yes'' on this commonsense measure. Tomorrow, let's all stand for the American people and in service to them rather than as a government that is not telling them what is best for them but is truly serving their interests and serving their needs. Please, stand and vote ``yes'' on the Health Exchange Security and Transparency Act.

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