Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I rise to honor Michael Eric Engh, S.J., on the occasion of his retirement as President of Santa Clara University, after a decade of extraordinary leadership.

Father Engh was born to Marie and Donald Engh in Los Angeles on December 14, 1949. He entered the Society of Jesus in 1972, and earned his M.A. at Gonzaga University in 1976. He earned his Master of Divinity degree from the Jesuit School of Theology, in Berkeley, California in 1982 and his Ph.D. at the University of Wisconsin in 1987.

Father Engh taught at Loyola Marymount University from 1988 to 2008, became Santa Clara University's 28th President on January 5, 2009, and retires from the Presidency after a most distinguished decade on June 30, 2019.

Father Engh serves on a number of boards, including the Board of Trustees of Boston College; the Board of Directors of the Silicon Valley Leadership Group; the Board of Directors of the Association of Jesuit Colleges and Universities; the Council of Presidents of the

Graduate Theological Union; and the Board of Trustees of Bellarmine College Preparatory.

Since arriving at Santa Clara, Father Engh has led the University in defining its vision and setting the course for the future with a bold plan, Santa Clara 2020. Under his decade of leadership the University 's endowment grew to $926 million in 2019, from $515 million in 2009. The University also recorded significant student accomplishments and accolades including Rhodes and Fulbright Scholars.

Ten new undergraduate majors were instituted, several Masters programs were launched, and the REAL program for summer research in the College of Arts & Sciences began, among many others, and the Law School's Intellectual Property Program was ranked fourth by US News in 2019. During Father Engh's tenure the campus was beautified and improved, and many new buildings were opened and facilities modernized, with many more in the process of development.

The era of Father Engh bears the imprimatur of diversity and inclusion. He established the Office for Diversity and Inclusion in 2013 and created the Blue Ribbon Commission on Diversity and Inclusion in 2016, increasing significantly the number of students of color from 45 percent to 51 percent.

Sustainability has been a hallmark of the Engh presidency. He signed the Climate Neutrality Action Plan and established the Office of Sustainability which grew into the Center for Sustainability with additional staff and programming. His efforts resulted in a deep-seated culture of sustainability across the entire University and ingrained in the community the importance of justice and sustainability.

Madam Speaker, I ask the entire House of Representatives to join me in honoring Father Michael Engh for his superb leadership of Santa Clara University which is not only a jewel in the crown of Jesuit universities but also one of the finest institutions of higher learning in the United States. His remarkable decade as President has strengthened our region, our state of California and he is a great blessing to our nation.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor a woman who has made extraordinary contributions to our nation, devoting more than 32 years of her professional life to management of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) at Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, California.

Deborah Feng's responsibilities at NASA included working with and understanding the operations of city government; financial management and budgeting; master planning and facilities construction; information technology; human resources; partnerships, safety and mission assurance; and communications and outreach. More recently, she has become widely known for her leadership in large leasing transactions for NASA Ames, notably the Moffett Federal Airfield Lease (2014). The culmination of her NASA career was serving as Associate Center Director.

In December 2018, Deborah Feng completed negotiations to build housing, including affordable apartments, on NASA property. This is the first such project in the nation for NASA employees and those who attend school on the property.

Ms. Feng, a Cupertino, California native, attended Lincoln Elementary School, Kennedy Middle School, and Monta Vista High School. She also attended De Anza Community College, where her father taught from the time the College opened in 1969 until his retirement 30 years later.

Ms. Feng is a graduate of the University of California, Berkeley, and received her bachelor's degree in Mass Communications, Radio and Television. She also earned her master's degree in Business Administration from San Jose State University and received the prestigious GOLD Award from the College of Business for her leadership in her graduate program.

Deborah Feng's personal interests include hiking and biking, often hiking the hills of Cupertino at Fremont Older and Rancho San Antonio. She is a first-degree black belt in Kempo karate and has a daughter Erica, 25, a graduate of De Anza, and a son Dustin, 19, a current student at De Anza.

Madam Speaker, I ask the entire House to join me in honoring Deborah Feng for her exemplary service to my constituents and to our entire country, and in wishing her success in her new career as Cupertino's City Manager.

Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (S. 1379) to reauthorize certain programs under the Public Health Service Act and the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act with respect to public health security and all-hazards preparedness and response, and for other purposes.

Madam 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 S. 1379.

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

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of this bipartisan legislation, the Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness and Advancing Innovation Act, fondly called PAHPA, so that is the way I am going to refer to it.

In January of this year, the House passed a version of this legislation by a vote of 401-17. It was the first suspension that was considered in this new Congress, and so I am really very, very pleased that the Senate finally took up this critical legislation and sent it back to the House for us to consider once again.

The bill strips out an unrelated issue that the Senate had to struggle with, and it simply includes the public health emergency and response legislation that my wonderful partner, Representative Susan Brooks, and I have worked on for over a year. Imagine how relieved we are and thrilled we are to be on the floor today with this. Our legislation reflects months of negotiations and compromise reached by the House and Senate.

We know the importance of the bill we are considering today, and it actually is critical to our national security.

In 2001, our country endured the horrific attacks on September 11 and the anthrax attacks that followed shortly thereafter. Congress realized at that time that our country was not prepared to coordinate responses to mass casualty events or chemical attacks, and it is why I wrote the legislation with then-Representative Richard Burr to address these shortfalls. This bill updates that original legislation by directing Federal agencies to respond to new and emerging threats and also strengthen our Nation's existing preparedness and response programs.

This bill reauthorizes critical programs that ensure our Nation is prepared to respond to naturally occurring and manmade disasters. Events over the past few years--the ongoing measles outbreak, destructive wildfires and hurricanes, and the reemergence of Ebola--as well as the constant looming threat of a biological attack by another nation or a hostile state enemy underscore the importance of this legislation.

These threats are real, and our country must be prepared to adequately respond to them. Our experience with each one of those hazards reminds us that our country is not yet adequately prepared to deal with potentially devastating, widespread public health crises. That is why this legislation is so critical, and this reauthorization meets the challenges that we face today and those we anticipate facing in the future.

The bill provides the authorization and Federal resources to invest in programs that allow the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority, or BARDA, to develop medical countermeasures for use after a public health emergency and to address antimicrobial resistance. PAHPA- I reauthorizes the HHS National Advisory Committee on Children and Disasters and also authorizes the Children's Preparedness Unit at the

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

I would just like to make a few comments in closing because I don't have any more speakers and assert my right to close last.

I think every good word that could be said about this legislation has already been stated, so I want to urge all of my colleagues to vote ``aye'' on this. It is legislation that has been scrutinized and re- scrutinized, and even though it has taken time and gone past its reauthorization date, that makes it all the more important that it be passed because the agencies really cannot do what we have been describing, and this has gone on since last October.

I think that the bookends on this are national security and public health preparedness for manmade disasters and others, and neither one of these can be addressed by any individual. This has to be done by us on behalf of our country.

So I want to thank Catherine Knowles for her very fine work in working with Rachel Fybel from my office. We really pay tribute to you because they have worked so hard every single day, not just for weeks, not just for months, but well over a year to get us to this point.

I urge all colleagues to support this legislation. We are proud to recommend it to them.

Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time,

Madam Speaker, I was unable to be present during roll call vote number 197, 198, 199, 200, 201, and 202 on May 10, 2019. Had I been present, I would have voted: on roll call vote number 197, I would have voted ``yes''; on roll call vote number 198, I would have voted ``yes''; on roll call vote number 199, I would have voted ``yes''; on roll call vote number 200, I would have voted ``yes''; on roll call vote number 201, I would have voted ``no''; and on roll call vote number 202, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 1520) to amend the Public Health Service Act to provide for the publication of a list of licensed biological products, and for other purposes, as amended.

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 H.R. 1520.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1520, the Purple Book Continuity Act of 2019. I am proud that my bipartisan legislation is being considered because it makes important updates and improvements to the Food and Drug Administration's Purple Book.

I am also pleased that it is the first drug pricing bill to be considered by the full House this Congress. The legislation makes it easier for manufacturers to research and develop biosimilars, which are essentially generic biological products, and drive down prescription drug prices for the American people.

The so-called ``Purple Book'' lists biological products, including biosimilars, that are licensed by the FDA. The Purple Book is a resource published by the FDA that includes very important information about existing products, about including designations that extend the product's exclusivity, and what active patents each product has.

Today, the FDA is not statutorily required to publish this information, nor is the agency required to update the resource in a timely manner. The Purple Book also is not currently user-friendly and is burdensome for companies to access and use. Companies rely on the Purple Book to inform their research and development activities, and it is imperative that the resource is up-to-date and easily accessible, so they can move quickly to produce cost-saving biosimilar drugs which are, essentially, as I said previously, generic versions of the most complex, high-cost biological products.

The Purple Book Continuity Act builds on previous work to promote the development of biosimilars and other alternatives to the highest-priced biologic products by putting necessary patent information into an easily accessible resource so companies can more efficiently and effectively direct their work to develop biosimilars.

The Purple Book Continuity Act takes an important step to make it easier for the manufacturers to access patent and exclusivity information they need to invest in biosimilar development so that drug prices--the whole point is so that drug prices can be lowered for the American people.

So the Purple Book Continuity Act passed the Energy and Commerce Committee by voice vote last month and, today, I urge my colleagues to support it.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 1503) to amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act regarding the list under section 505(j)(7) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, and for other purposes, as amended.

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 H.R. 1503.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1503. This is a different color book. It is the Orange Book Transparency Act of 2019, sponsored by the gentlewoman from Illinois, Congresswoman Robin Kelly. Her bipartisan legislation makes important updates to the Food and Drug Administration's Orange Book to ensure that this resource is accurate and up-to-date to promote the development of generic drugs that save so many Americans so much money.

When it passed in 1984, the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act, also referred to as Hatch-Waxman, created the Orange Book as a resource for drug manufacturers to reference when deciding when and how to seek approval for new drug products. The so-called ``Orange Book'' contains valuable information, is regularly referenced by manufacturers, and is published in a user-friendly way on FDA's website.

But this resource has not been updated since it was created in 1994. That is a long time ago. It is over 3 decades ago. And the Orange Book Transparency Act of 2019 makes important updates to the resource to adapt to the changes in drug development since Hatch-Waxman became law.

Generic drug manufacturers rely heavily on the Orange Book, and it is imperative that this resource is accurate and up-to-date so drug manufacturers can invest in products that promote competition and lower drug prices for the American people.

The Orange Book Transparency Act of 2019 passed the Energy and Commerce Committee by voice vote last month, and I was proud to support it. I urge my colleagues to support the Orange Book Transparency Act of 2019 today.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Kelly), the author of H.R. 1503 and a wonderful member of the Health Subcommittee.

Mr. Speaker, I urge all Members of the House to support this bipartisan legislation that is going to move us closer to our overall goal of lowering the cost of prescription drugs for the American people.

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

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

Madam Speaker, I was unable to be present during roll call vote number 157, 158, and 159, on April 8, 2019. Had I been present, I would have voted: on roll call vote number 157, yes; on roll call vote number 158, yes; and on roll call vote number 159, yes.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the distinguished chairman of the subcommittee for yielding.

First, I include in the Record a letter from the County of Santa Clara, California, relative to the issue of net neutrality and the underlying legislation.

County of Santa Clara,

Office of the County Executive,

San Jose, CA, April 4, 2019.

Hon. Anna Eshoo,

House of Representatives,

Washington, DC.

Dear Representative Eshoo: The County of Santa Clara

strongly supports H.R. 1644, the ``Save the Internet Act of

2019.'' This measure would re-establish federal rules and

policies protecting net neutrality as articulated by the

Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in its 2015 Report

and Order, In the Matter of Protecting and Promoting the Open

Internet (FCC 15-24) (the Order).

Like local governments across the country, the County of

Santa Clara provides public safety, welfare, and governance

services that depend on an open internet. For example, County

public health alert systems and the County's virtual

emergency operations center could both be hobbled by

broadband internet access service (BIAS) provider practices

subject to regulation under the Order. The County is deeply

concerned that there currently is no ``cop on the beat''

ensuring the protection of such systems, and thus strongly

supports H.R. 1644, which would reestablish oversight of BIAS

provider practices that threaten public safety.

The County's concerns are particularly acute in light of

its past experience with BIAS provider practices. The

County's experience has demonstrated that BIAS providers will

act in their own economic interests, even when doing so

threatens public safety. For example, shortly after the FCC

revoked net neutrality protections, Verizon throttled Santa

Clara County firefighters in the midst of their efforts to

fight the then-largest fire in California history--despite

repeated requests to remove the throttling and allow the

firefights to perform their duties. These events are outlined

in the attached Declaration, submitted to the U.S. Court of

Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.

Net neutrality is also vital to the continued economic

success of our region. Santa Clara County is a world-leading

hub of high-technology innovation and development and is home

to almost 2 million residents. Net neutrality is necessary

for the prosperity of the county's economy, as it encourages

competition among businesses, fosters innovation, creates

jobs, and promotes economic vitality both within the county

and across the nation.

Preserving net neutrality for County of Santa Clara

residents has long been an action point for the County. In

2017, the County's Board of Supervisors unanimously adopted

resolution number BOS-2017-105, Resolution of the Board of

Supervisors of the County of Santa Clara Supporting the

Preservation of Federal Rules and Policies Protecting Net

Neutrality, to publicly confirm its support of an open

internet. In addition, the County of Santa Clara and the

Santa Clara County Central Fire Protection District, along

with the City and County of San Francisco, California Public

Utilities Commission, 22 states (including California), the

District of Columbia, and several private and nonprofit

entities filed a lawsuit (Docket 181051, D.C. Cir.)

challenging the FCC's December 2017 decision to repeal net

neutrality policies with its Report and Order, In the Matter

of Restoring Internet Freedom (FCC 17-166).

By restoring the FCC's 2015 order In the Matter of

Protecting and Promoting the Open Internet, H.R. 1644 would

ensure net neutrality. In addition, the bill would nullify

the FCC's 2017 order In the Matter of Restoring Internet

Freedom and would prohibit the enactment of any other rule

substantially the same as this order, unless the new rule is

specifically authorized by a law enacted after the date of

the enactment of H.R. 1644. It is for these reasons we

support H.R. 1644.

On behalf of the County and its residents, thank you for

your co-sponsorship of this important measure that will

protect net neutrality rules and policies now and in future.

Sincerely,

Jeffrey V. Smith, M.D., J.D.,

County Executive.

Enclosure: Declaration of Fire Chief Anthony Bowden (Docket

18-1051, D.C. Cir.)

Mr. Chair, I rise in support of this bill. To those who may be viewing and listening in, it sounds as if, from my Republican friends, that the sky is actually coming down around our ears. I have good news for you. It isn't.

The ranking member of the full committee said that the Republicans simply are opposed to paid prioritization, throttling, and blocking. But there is something else that the American people need to know. What they are against here is what they call the heavy hand of government. We say it is the Federal Communications Commission that should be able to enforce the law against throttling, blocking, and paid prioritization.

It is as simple as that. They don't want a cop on the beat.

This is a very simple, three-page bill, but it is powerful because it puts in place the protections that the FCC came up with in 2015. Notably, the courts upheld that decision.

There is much talk on the other side of the aisle about Silicon Valley. You are not from Silicon Valley; I represent it. There are companies there that had filed suit against the ISPs because of what they have done.

If you don't think that the ISPs haven't misbehaved, talk to the firefighters of Santa Clara County. Talk to them. They were fighting the worst fire in California's history when they were being throttled. They called Verizon, and Verizon tried to sell them an upgraded plan as they were trying to save lives.

Across America, 86 percent of the American people--Democrats, Republicans, and Independents--support what we are doing. We want this for our constituents. We want the protection of consumers. We don't want any mitts on the internet. It is as simple as that. Groups from A to Z, from the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops to the American Library Association, support this.

I am proud to be a net neutrality warrior, and I ask everyone in the House to become one, too, by voting for H.R. 1644. It is a simple, three-page, powerful bill that will serve the people of our country well.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H. Res. 271, Condemning the Trump Administration's Legal Campaign to Take Away Americans' Health Care.

Last week, the Trump Administration launched a monstrous attack on our nation's health care system and on the people of our country when it was announced that they would be joining the 18 Republican state attorneys general in support of the Texas vs. United States lawsuit to strike down the entirety of the Affordable Care Act. By joining this lawsuit, the Trump Administration demonstrated they do not believe Americans should have access to comprehensive, affordable health insurance or that the 130 million Americans with preexisting conditions should be protected.

I've already heard from many constituents who are frightened about losing protections for their preexisting conditions, panicking about being able to afford their medical bills, and worried about where they can go to get their health insurance if this lawsuit succeeds.

For those enrolled in the Affordable Care Act, if this lawsuit is successful, 13 million Americans who gained health insurance through the Medicaid expansion will lose their health insurance; the 9 million Americans who rely on tax credits to help them afford their insurance plan will no longer be able to afford their insurance; and the 130 million patients with preexisting conditions could be denied coverage or charged more.

Since the Affordable Care Act was signed into law over 20 million Americans have gained health insurance that requires coverage for preexisting conditions; disallows charging sick consumers more; allows children to stay on their parent's health insurance until the age of 26; and provides coverage for preventive health services with no cost sharing.

The insurance reforms of the ACA protect every American, including those who get their health insurance through their employer. Every insurance plan today is required to cover ten basic Essential Health Benefits; there are no longer lifetime limits; and women can no longer be charged more because they are females. All of this is at risk if this lawsuit succeeds, and the Trump Administration demonstrated their total disregard for the consequences of its actions on the people of our country last week.

On the first day of the 116th Congress the House voted to intervene in this lawsuit on behalf of the tens of millions of Americans who rely on and have benefited from the ACA. Today, we renew our promise to the American people that we will fight this Administration's sabotage and do everything to protect, defend and improve the ACA.

The resolution we're considering today condemns the Texas vs. United States lawsuit and the Trump Administration's recent actions to intervene to seek the invalidation of every provision of the ACA. It calls on the Department of Justice to protect Americans with preexisting conditions, cease their efforts to destroy access to affordable health care, and reverse its position in the court case. I urge my colleagues to support this timely and critically important resolution we are considering today

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1839, the Medicaid Services Investment and Accountability Act of 2019. I'm very

pleased the House is considering this bipartisan, bicameral legislation to extend and authorize important Medicaid programs that serve medically complex children, seniors, and people with disabilities, mental health and substance use disorders.

I'm especially proud that H.R. 1839 includes the ACE Kids Act. ACE Kids is the product of years of extensive work by my colleagues, former Congressman Joe Barton and Congresswoman Kathy Castor. This bill will improve care for the sickest children enrolled in Medicaid, which is the backbone of our health care system for these children. Children with complex medical conditions require a large amount of health services which are expensive and difficult for families to coordinate. The ACE Kids Act aims to better coordinate this care while reducing overall Medicaid spending. Each state's program will be specifically tailored to fit each child's needs and will provide families with a care coordinator. It is based on existing programs that save money while decreasing hospital visits and improving care. This legislation has broad bipartisan support and was passed by the House last December by a vote of 400 to 11. I urge all Members of the House to support it.

This bill also extends spousal impoverishment protections for recipients of home and community based services in Medicaid. These important protections ensure that spouses of Medicaid patients do not have to spend down their own assets for the Medicaid beneficiary to qualify for home and community based long term care services. Home and community based long term care services are critical to meeting the care and treatment needs of Medicaid beneficiaries, but spouses should not have to risk impoverishment for their loves ones to access these important services.

H.R. 1839 authorizes additional funding for the Money Follows the Person demonstration which has been successful in transitioning Medicaid beneficiaries out of institutions into community settings. The bill also extends the Excellence in Mental Health demonstration for two states to provide mental health services in community settings. Evidence shows that keeping patients in their communities and out of institutions improves outcomes, and I'm pleased to support extensions of these critical programs to ensure that patients can access services in the best setting for their needs.

The bill offsets these important extensions by closing loopholes that drug companies have exploited to misclassify their drugs and receive inappropriate rebates on their products. It also makes changes to third-party liability in child support, and denies federal funding for penis pumps in Medicaid.

I'm grateful that this bipartisan, bicameral legislation is being considered today to strengthen the Medicaid program for children with complex medical conditions, seniors, and people with disabilities, mental health and substance use disorders and I'm very proud to support it.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, I can't believe what I am hearing from my colleagues on the other side of the aisle.

Against higher ethics in Congress, they are, what, accepting any kind of corruption in this institution and what corrupts our democracy? You are for gerrymandering? You want dark money to continue?

This is absurd. This is about strengthening our democracy. This should have 435 votes. I am so proud that two of my bills have been incorporated into H.R. 1; one is that we have a national holiday for our national elections. People shouldn't have to choose between their job or their families. They should be able to go and vote.

Presidents and all Presidential candidates should be mandated to put out 10 years of their tax returns so that the American people can vet them in their own minds to see if they are worthy of the highest office in the land.

Mr. Chair, I'm very proud to be a cosponsor of H.R. 8, the Bipartisan Background Checks Act of 2019, the most significant gun violence legislation to be considered in the House in over a decade. H.R. 8 strengthens our current laws on background checks by closing loopholes and ensuring that dangerous people do not have the opportunity to purchase a weapon. This legislation is critical and long overdue because 40 percent of gun sales are made with no background check at all.

Over 70 percent of Americans, including a majority of gun owners, support universal background checks. Why? Because they help keep guns out of the hands of criminals. The current system has already stopped three million gun sales to convicted felons and others who are prohibited by law from owning a firearm. These checks do nothing to infringe upon the right of law-abiding citizens to keep and use firearms for recreation, subsistence, or even self-defense, and importantly, the vast majority of background checks are completed within minutes.

When the Supreme Court first recognized an individual's right to carry a gun in the 2008 case District of Columbia v. Heller, it also acknowledged that the Second Amendment does not prevent Congress from imposing reasonable restrictions on gun sales. The right of responsible citizens to keep and bear arms must be carefully weighed against the right of all Americans to live in a safe society, and I believe H.R. 8 strikes the right balance between protecting the latter without infringing upon the former.

For too long, unreasonable forces have prevented serious consideration of virtually any gun legislation, no matter how commonsense it is. Ninety-six Americans are killed by a gun every day, and we owe it to them, their families, and the people of Newtown, Orlando, Las Vegas, Parkland, and so many other communities to take meaningful action. Too many innocent lives have been taken and the American people deserve so much better.

I wish to thank the thousands of devoted activists, including Moms Demand Action, for raising their voices across my Congressional District and across our country to end gun violence in our nation.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this bipartisan legislation, the Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness and Advancing Innovation Act. I've worked on this legislation with my partner Representative Susan Brooks for almost a year and it reflects months of negotiations and compromise reached by the House and Senate. This bill also includes important updates to the Over-the-Counter Monograph program at the Food and Drug Administration. I am proud to reintroduce this bill in the 116th Congress and pleased the House is taking it up so quickly.

The Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness and Advancing Innovation Act we're considering today is critical to our national security. The legislation updates the original Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness Act I authored with then-Representativelichard Burr in 2006, by directing federal agencies to respond to new and emerging threats, and strengthen our nation's existing preparedness and response programs. This legislation reauthorizes critical programs that ensure our nation is prepared to respond to naturally occurring and manmade disasters. These threats are real and our country must be prepared to adequately respond to them. This reauthorization meets the challenges that we face today and those we anticipate facing in the future. The policies in this bill are almost identical to those passed under suspension by the House in September 2018 with small changes made at the request of the Senate. The House passed an identical bill at the end of the 115th Congress by a vote of 367 to 9.

This bill also includes overdue updates to the Over-the-Counter Monograph program which will streamline the process by which over-the- counter products are regulated and approved by FDA and will improve patient safety. It establishes a new user fee program that will enable FDA to act faster to address safety issues associated with over-the- counter drugs and bring innovative over-the-counter drugs to market.

It's imperative that after the House passes this legislation today that the Senate take it up quickly and send it to the President's desk as soon as possible. PAHPA expired on September 30th and reauthorizing these programs is critical to our national security.

I'm proud of this legislation and I urge my colleagues to support the Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness and Advancing Innovation Act.

Mr. Speaker, I was unable to be present during roll call vote number 483, 484, 485, 486, 487, 488, 489, 490, 491, 492, 493, 494, 495, 496, 497, 498, 499, and 500 on December 21, 2018, due to a death in my family. Had I been present, I would have voted:

On rollcall vote No. 483, I would have voted yes.

On rollcall vote No. 484, I would have voted yes.

On rollcall vote No. 485, I would have voted no.

On rollcall vote No. 486, I would have voted yes.

On rollcall vote No. 487, I would have voted yes.

On rollcall vote No 488, I would have voted yes.

On rollcall vote No. 489, I would have voted yes.

On rollcall vote No. 490, I would have voted yes.

On rollcall vote No. 491, I would have voted yes.

On rollcall vote No. 492, I would have voted yes.

On rollcall vote No. 493, I would have voted yes.

On rollcall vote No. 494, I would have voted no.

On rollcall vote No. 495, I would have voted yes.

On rollcall vote No. 496, I would have voted yes.

On rollcall vote No. 497, I would have voted no.

On rollcall vote No. 498, I would have voted no.

On rollcall vote No. 499, I would have voted yes.

On rollcall vote No. 500, I would have voted yes.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 7328. This is a good bill. I think it is an

important one. It is the Over-the-Counter Monograph Safety, Innovation, and Reform Act of 2018. Kind of a mouthful, but what it does is it streamlines how over-the-counter drugs are regulated. This will enable the FDA, the Food and Drug Administration, to act faster to address safety issues associated with over-the-counter drugs and bring innovative over-the-counter drugs to market.

The legislation will also establish a new user fee program to provide the FDA with reliable and stable funding to implement the reforms in this bill. These user fees are already in place with the pharmaceutical industry, with others. It works very well, and it allows hiring the necessary additional staff to oversee the over-the-counter market.

This updated legislation, very importantly, reflects that it is both bipartisan and bicameral, and I urge the entire House to support the bill.

I also want to point out that, rolled into this bill, H.R. 7328, is what we call PAHPA, the Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness and Advancing Innovation Act. I am very proud to have authored this originally in a past Congress. But also my partner in this Congress has been Congresswoman Susan Brooks. I couldn't ask for a finer partner.

The legislation really reflects months of negotiations and compromise reached by both the House and the Senate, and the bill makes important updates to, as I said, the over-the-counter monograph program.

What we are considering in terms of this particular bill is an update, and it directs Federal agencies to respond to new and emerging threats and strengthens our Nation's existing preparedness and response programs. This has a great deal to do with our national security, and that is why it is so important.

The legislation not only reauthorizes critical programs to allow our country to be prepared to respond to naturally occurring and manmade disasters--and we know these threats are real--but it also meets the challenges that we face today and those that we anticipate facing in the future.

I am very glad that this legislation was rolled into H.R. 7328, and I once again want to salute the work that Congresswoman Susan Brooks did on this particular bill that is part of H.R. 7328.

Mr. Speaker, I have two speakers on my side, but I will reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Michigan (Mrs. Dingell), my friend and colleague.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. DeGette).

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

I don't have any other speakers, but let me just close by saying I think that, between the chairman of our subcommittee and my two colleagues and their remarks--and mine included--that these are very good bills that are going to accomplish good things for the American people. So whether it is what was rolled into H.R. 7328--PAHPA and the underlying bill, the Over-the-Counter Monograph Safety, Innovation, and Reform Act--I feel very confident that, with its passage, we will have accomplished something that is excellent for the American people.

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