Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, as the gentlewoman from New Jersey said, my colleagues and I will show and prove our true intentions in occupying our seats here in Congress.

We will have the chance to stand with the 24 million Americans who have health coverage thanks to the Affordable Care Act or cosign billion-dollar tax cuts to the wealthy. We will have the chance to reject the attacks on the health of women and older Americans or force Americans to pay more for less. We will have the chance to choose between what is best for all or what is best for some. We will choose between right and wrong.

Changes to the current law proposed in the un-American Health Care Act, also known as TrumpCare, could result in cuts to benefits, increased costs, or reduced coverage for older Americans.

According to the 2016 Medicare Trustees Report, the Medicare part A trust fund is solvent until 2028. This is 11 years longer than predicted in 2009, due in large part to the changes made in the ACA.

Repealing the additional 0.9 percent payroll tax on high-income workers, as proposed in this new bill, would remove $117.3 billion from the Hospital Insurance Trust Fund over the next 10 years. It would hasten the insolvency of Medicare by up to 4 years and diminish Medicare's ability to pay for services in the future.

Additionally, provisions of the un-American Health Care Act that create a per capita cap financing structure in the Medicaid program is equally dangerous. These provisions would endanger the health, safety, and care of millions of individuals who depend on the essential services provided through Medicaid.

The CBO found that the bill would cut Medicaid funding by $880 billion over 2017 to 2026. Medicare and Medicaid must be protected and strengthened for older Americans and future generations.

Any healthcare legislation presented must take into consideration future generations of men and women who will take our seats in this Chamber, future generations that will produce our first woman President, future generations of women that hopefully will not have to fight against men meddling in their healthcare decisions.

This bill is a war on women, and, quite frankly, there is nothing pro-life about it. This bill attacks women's access to reproductive health care from every angle, undermining not just contraception access and abortion coverage, but also making it much harder for women to receive maternity coverage when they do give birth.

The abortion rate is at a historic low, and most analysts say the principal reason is that the ACA made contraception cheaper and easier to obtain. The CBO report was all-encompassing, but most strikingly pointed out a provision that would undermine Planned Parenthood, a critical provider for women's health care.

This provision would bar women on Medicaid from using their coverage to go to Planned Parenthood, immediately resulting in many of these women losing access to contraception and leading to closing of clinics nationwide.

The CBO estimated that 15 percent of women living in low-income and otherwise underserved areas would lose their access to services to prevent pregnancy. In short, local access to reproductive health care dries up.

In short, this is unacceptable. Just as I opened, I am going to close. Tomorrow my colleagues and I will show and prove our true intentions in occupying our seats here in Congress. We will have the chance to stand with the 24 million Americans who have healthcare coverage thanks to the Affordable Care Act, or cosign billion-dollar tax cuts to the wealthy as proposed under the Trump healthcare bill.

We will have the chance to reject the attacks on the health of women and the working families or force Americans to pay far more for far less, and we will have the chance to choose between what is best for all or what is best for some. Tomorrow, with the votes cast on this bill, we will get the chance to choose between right and wrong.

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

I rise in support of H.R. 1297.

The Department of Homeland Security's mission is complex and diverse. Not only is DHS charged with preventing terrorism, but it is the lead Federal agency for immigration enforcement, emergency management, cybersecurity, and border, maritime, and transportation security.

Given the breadth of DHS' responsibilities, it is essential that its limited resources be aligned with its mission to meet the ever-changing threat landscape. As such, the Quadrennial Homeland Security Review, which DHS undertakes every 4 years, is a critical tool to ensure that the Department is positioned to effectively carry out its multifaceted mission.

To date, DHS has issued two such reviews and is expected to release its third such review in 2018. My legislation seeks to make refinements to the law to address weaknesses identified by the Government Accountability Office in the prior reviews.

Specifically, my bill seeks to ensure more robust consultation with Homeland Security stakeholders, including State and local governments and academic institutions.

It also seeks to ensure that DHS undertakes and documents our risk analysis to inform its policy positions. GAO emphasized that documentation of the review process, including the risk analysis, is essential to ensuring the repeatability of the review process.

Last Congress, this House unanimously approved this measure in July 2016; however, the Senate did not act on the bill. Last week the Committee on Homeland Security, on a bipartisan basis, voted to favorably report this measure to the House.

My legislation is intended to ensure that the Quadrennial Homeland Security Review is a driving vision for the Department of Homeland Security. By enacting this legislation, Congress can guard against it becoming a paperwork exercise that fails to influence the Department's policies, programs, and priorities.

Given the criticalness of the DHS mission and the increasingly scarce availability of resources, it is essential that DHS produce a risk- informed review that takes into account the diverse views of its Homeland Security partners.

Mr. Speaker, I urge the passage of H.R. 1297, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1249, the DHS Multiyear Acquisition Strategy Act of 2017, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Safeguarding our country and the American people is the Department of Homeland Security's most solemn responsibility.

Today, Homeland Security threats are multidimensional and changing at an unprecedented pace. As such, it is critical that DHS' acquisition programs be targeted to meet the demands of an ever-evolving threat environment. To ensure long-term strategic planning, H.R. 1249 directs DHS to develop a multiyear acquisition strategy as is currently required at the Transportation Security Administration.

The bill is intended to foster a more strategic approach to how DHS executes and manages procurement. Specifically, it directs DHS, in consultation with industry stakeholders and academia, to develop a prioritized list of major acquisitions together with information on the expected security and economic benefits of these programs.

To guard against wasteful spending on redundant programs, it also directs DHS to work towards developing a DHS-wide inventory of investments and real property. Once DHS has such an inventory, I believe it will find areas for greater efficiency and be able to redirect limited Homeland Security resources to vital programs.

One of the critical features of the strategy is the requirement that DHS have a plan to address funding gaps that may exist in major acquisition programs.

Given that the Trump administration's 2018 budget prioritizes funding the border wall that the President promised during the campaign and amplifying immigration enforcement, there is a real concern that important programs that are desperately needed within DHS will get short shrift.

H.R. 1249 was approved unanimously by the Committee on Homeland Security earlier this month, and similar legislation was approved by a voice vote by the House in October of 2015.

Mr. Speaker, the establishment of the Department-wide acquisition strategy, as H.R. 1249 requires, has the potential of helping the Department achieve economies of scale that result in cost savings and better use of limited Homeland Security resources.

I am particularly pleased that the legislation directs the Department to assess ways it can better test and acquire innovative technologies. Some of the most vexing Homeland Security challenges can only be fully addressed when DHS partners with innovators, particularly small businesses.

I want to congratulate the gentleman, my colleague from Pennsylvania.

Mr. Speaker, I would urge the support of H.R. 1249, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

I rise in support of H.R. 1252, the DHS Acquisition Authorities Act of 2017. The Department of Homeland Security has limited acquisition resources and must be effective stewards of taxpayer dollars. As such, DHS' procurement practices must be sound, effective, and adhered to throughout the organization.

Although DHS has come a long way since its inception in 2002, acquisition management remains a challenge for the Department. In fact, a 2015 assessment by the GAO of DHS' largest acquisition programs determined that only 2 of the 22 reviewed programs were on track to meet their initial schedule and cost parameters.

Responsibility for addressing weaknesses in acquisitions management and increasing effectiveness of DHS' major acquisitions begins at the top, with the DHS leadership. To that end, H.R. 1252 codifies that acquisition decision authority rests with the Under Secretary for Management as the Department's Chief Acquisition Officer.

H.R. 1252 authorizes the Under Secretary for Management to mandate acquisition policies, establishes the Under Secretary as lead of the Department's acquisition oversight body, and charges the Under Secretary with advising the Secretary regarding acquisition management activities.

To ensure greater oversight of the Department's procurement activities, H.R. 1252 also establishes acquisition management functions for DHS' Chief Financial Officer, Chief Information Officer, and the Program Accountability and Risk Management Office.

This legislation is intended to clarify roles and responsibilities within DHS acquisition management activities and increase accountability of the Department's procedures, particularly those classified as underperforming.

H.R. 1252 was approved by the House in October 2015, and was approved unanimously by the Committee on Homeland Security just a few weeks ago.

Given the complexity of the organization, it is incumbent upon the Department to tackle its diverse procurement challenges from the top down.

H.R. 1252 codifies the acquisition management roles within the Department and supports enhanced accountability in management of DHS' acquisitions.

By passing this legislation, Congress can take another important step toward increasing efficiency and improving outcomes of DHS' major acquisition programs.

I join in congratulating the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Higgins) on the good work that he has done here.

Mr. Speaker, I urge support of H.R. 1252, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I wish I could say that the Republicans' attack on the poor and vulnerable through this disastrous healthcare bill is a surprise. But, unfortunately, in my home State, Republican leadership has laid out the framework for their very own attack.

Last week, Governor Chris Christie dealt another blow to the welfare of New Jerseyans by seeking to fund his State budget by siphoning money from Horizon, the State's largest healthcare insurer, serving over 900,000 Medicaid members in New Jersey. Horizon's reserve fund exists to protect healthcare consumers in the face of uncertainty. But, Mr. Speaker, New Jerseyans are currently facing tremendous uncertainty due to proposals by Republicans in Congress to roll back Medicaid.

Mr. Speaker, the threats are clear. Governor Christie's proposal would destabilize Horizon and raise consumer premiums just when hundreds of thousands of New Jerseyans may lose Medicaid coverage or have premium subsidies withdrawn at the hands of reckless Federal lawmakers.

In my district alone, 40,600 New Jerseyans currently covered by the ACA's Medicaid expansion now stand to lose their coverage if eliminated. Both Governor Christie's budget raid and the Republican healthcare proposal are prescriptions for disaster. These plans are not only lazy and careless, but are also unworkable strategies that will only result in chaos across the healthcare industry of New Jersey and this country.

Mr. Speaker, today begins Women's History Month, and I am proud to use this occasion to lift up our achievements, our perseverance and dedication to a more equal and balanced world. That is why it is so unfortunate that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle and President Trump's White House insist on harming women through their stubborn adherence to antiwomen policies.

One prime example is their assault on the Affordable Care Act. The facts are clear: ACA prohibits charging women more than men for insurance; ACA establishes preventive services to be provided at no extra cost to women, including annual well-women exams, breastfeeding support, supplies for new moms, birth control, and screening and counseling for domestic and intimate partner violence; 9.5 million previously uninsured women now have coverage through ACA; 55 million now have access to vital preventive care at no cost.

These are not alternative facts or fake news. If this is the Trump Republicans' gift to us in celebration of Women's History Month, I hope they keep the receipt.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the ranking member.

Mr. Chairman, there are many troubling aspects of this bill, but most pressing is that this legislation, without clear policy rationale, caters to demands of my Republican colleagues to slash existing regulations and muddy the process of passing new ones.

Congress already has a responsibility of reviewing existing rules and mandating reform. Why delegate that to those not elected to do so?

This unsettling bill spends millions of taxpayer dollars to create a hand-picked commission to do the job of Congress without accountability. No, thank you.

This unelected and unaccountable commission, appointed by the President and Congress, would submit regulatory changes without the opportunity to amend the measure, taking regulatory review out of the hands of the agency experts. This is counterproductive and an insult to the democratic process.

To add insult to injury, this bill makes the regulatory process transactional.

By forcing agencies to repeal regulations in order to adopt a new one, we risk public health and safety.

Why have they prioritized costs over benefit? Why are American lives on the chopping block?

I urge my colleagues to vote no against this bill.

Mr. Speaker, today I have the personal pleasure and honor of saying a few words about a leader in our community who has dedicated his life to the betterment of others.

Bob Oliver is the president and CEO of Otsuka America Pharmaceutical, Inc., which is a healthcare company based in my district in Princeton, New Jersey. Bob's strategic leadership over the last 7 years has been instrumental in developing a diverse portfolio of marketed products, specifically focusing on neuroscience, cardio-renal, and oncology. He is personally passionate about helping others and those who care for them.

He has worked for over 40 years helping others navigate the healthcare system more easily and has publicly addressed mental health stigma, disparity in healthcare treatment, and the future of health care using technology advancements. He has worked closely with local advocacy groups to aid veterans and other individuals struggling with homelessness, mental illness, addiction, and poverty.

In addition to being a community partner, through his leadership role at Otsuka, he has been instrumental in driving economic growth in the pharmaceutical sector, as well as creating job opportunities in my State.

Most recently, he was featured as one of Ebony Magazine's Power 100, an esteemed panelist with CNN's Fareed Zakaria, and a featured leader in Forbes Magazine. The journey is just beginning as he closes this chapter in Otsuka and proceeds to move forward in his life.

He has made us very proud. We are proud to take this moment to address his accomplishments and to thank him for his lifetime of achievement. We wish him the best of luck and Godspeed.

Mr. Speaker, I rise this afternoon because I am appalled by President Trump and my Republican colleagues' attacks on the health of Americans. My Republican colleagues have spent 6 years disparaging the Affordable Care Act from its very inception, describing it as a ``death spiral,'' ``failure,'' and ``collapsing,'' but zero time offering up any viable alternative.

After 6 years of hollow grandstanding, Republicans now face the clear realization that repealing the Affordable Care Act will dump massive costs on families and businesses, blow a hole in the Federal budget, and strip coverage for more than 30 million Americans.

New Jersey has been a positive example of ACA implementation. Since enactment, Medicaid expansion through ACA has insured more than 700,000 middle-income New Jersey residents who couldn't previously afford it. The uninsured rate in New Jersey dropped from 13.2 percent in 2013 to 8.7 percent in 2015.

Mr. Speaker, these are positive trends, but President Trump and Republicans in Washington callously disregard these facts so they can live up to their reckless promises. I hope that they will see the wisdom in their mistake and make sure that we keep all Americans healthy.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleagues for joining me tonight to stand in solidarity with our neighbors in Canada, and honor the victims of the January 29 terrorist attack at the Quebec Islamic Cultural Center in Quebec City.

A house of worship is a place of refuge, peace, and reflection, but for the 6 people killed, the 19 wounded, and the entire community, that hallowed ground is now tainted--yet, shall always remain covered in love.

Let our presence here serve as a reminder that we will stand up against bigotry and hatred wherever it takes place.

I now ask my colleagues to bow their heads and join us for a moment of silence.

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

I rise in support of H.R. 366, the DHS Stop Asset and Vehicle Excess Act.

H.R. 366 seeks to improve the Department of Homeland Security's management, acquisition, and oversight of its fleet of roughly 53,000 vehicles. H.R. 366 requires the Under Secretary for Management to provide departmental components with a standardized vehicle allocation methodology for components to utilize to develop fleet management plans.

This legislation was informed by oversight that was conducted by the Department's inspector general. The inspector general found that, in 2014 and 2015, the DHS did not adequately manage or have the enforcement authority over components to ensure that the composition of its motor vehicle fleet was right sized. This lack of effective management led to the overuse of sports utility vehicles, unnecessary discretionary equipment packages, and overpayments to the GSA.

Further, the Committee on Homeland Security received testimony from the Director of the Federal Protective Service that roughly half of the 1,100 vehicles in FPS' fleet were underutilized or had fewer than 12,000 miles. H.R. 366 grants authority to the DHS headquarters over components with respect to managing vehicle fleets.

Specifically, under H.R. 366, the DHS is directed to establish requirements for components to more rigorously evaluate their fleets on an ongoing basis. Additionally, this bill directs the DHS to identify alternative methods for managing component fleets, such as a shared motor pool. The DHS has the second largest civilian vehicle fleet in the Federal Government at an operating cost of about $462 million.

There is a critical linkage between the Department's operational effectiveness in national security missions and the effective management of the resources and requirements by the DHS leadership. As such, enhancing oversight and management should help the Department more effectively spend limited taxpayer dollars on what the Department actually needs to carry out its mission.

H.R. 366 seeks to improve the management of DHS' vehicle fleet by strengthening the oversight and management of the Department's fleet by the Under Secretary for Management. It is also worth noting that H.R. 366 includes language that I authored to ensure that the inspector general's oversight of the DHS' management of its vehicle fleet continues.

I commend the OIG for its robust and ongoing oversight of the Department's vehicle fleet. I also commend my colleague on the Homeland Security Committee, Mr. Perry, for introducing this legislation and working in a bipartisan fashion to advance it.

I urge the passage of H.R. 366.

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

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

I rise in support of H.R. 347, the DHS Acquisition Documentation Integrity Act of 2017.

I reintroduced H.R. 347, a measure that the House unanimously approved on February 23, 2016, to ensure that the progress that the Department of Homeland Security has made with respect to how it manages acquisitions continues.

H.R. 347 requires complete, accurate, timely, and valid documentation to be maintained for each of the Department's major acquisition programs, which is defined as one with a life cycle cost estimate of $300 million or more. The required documentation includes information regarding operational requirements, a complete life cycle cost estimate, a cost-benefit analysis, and a schedule.

Under this legislation, the DHS component heads would also be required to submit certain documentation to the DHS Secretary for inclusion in an annual status report on the Department's acquisitions. While there have been improvements to acquisitions management under former Secretary Jeh Johnson, the Department has struggled when it comes to delivering a specific program on time and at an established cost.

Most of the DHS' major acquisition programs continue to cost more than expected, take longer to deploy than planned, or deliver less capability than promised. For example, the DHS' efforts to deliver a Department-wide human resources IT system--HR-IT--have spanned almost 14 years and have cost millions of dollars with little to show for it. As can be seen with the case of HR-IT, anything less than up-to-date acquisition documentation increases the odds of cost and schedule overruns, risks delayed delivery of critical capabilities, and depletes resources needed to address future requirements.

As such, H.R. 347 codifies ``best practices'' already embodied in the DHS' acquisition policy and necessary for the success of the DHS' mission. H.R. 347 requires the DHS Secretary, through the Under Secretary for Management, to require components to maintain specific types of acquisition documentation.

Representatives McCaul and Thompson, the chairman and ranking member of our committee, and Representative Perry, the chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Management Efficiency, cosponsored this legislation, which reflects a strong commitment to bolstering the effectiveness of the DHS' acquisition programs in a bipartisan fashion.

I urge the passage of H.R. 347, a bill that will help ensure that the DHS is a good steward of taxpayer dollars and can provide the DHS' operators in the field with the tools they need to protect the American people.

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman.

In his first full week as President, Donald Trump continued to make a mockery of the ideas upon which our Nation was founded. In addition, his de facto Muslim ban is contrary to the national security interests of the United States. His actions are not only discriminatory and bigoted, but also reckless, dangerous, and counterproductive to any authentic effort to defeat terrorism.

As a member of the House Homeland Security Committee, I am concerned this will only serve to stoke anti-American sentiment across the globe, including our international partners committed to eradicating global terror threats.

My colleagues have outlined the ways in which men and women they represent have been impacted at this present moment, and highlight the uncertainty that those constituents feel about the future. But we cannot forget those who have come to this country in pursuit of the future that the American Dream has promised.

Close to 17,000 students from the seven affected countries attend U.S. colleges and universities. The 12th District of New Jersey represents these

men and women, both young and old, at a multitude of 2-year, 4-year, and technical institutions.

The President of Princeton University--one of the most revered institutions in the world, housed in the heart of my district--released a statement concerned that the success of Princeton and many other institutions of higher education across this Nation depend on America's ability to attract and engage with talented people from around the world.

Rutgers University, the flagship public university in my State, has students, researchers, and professors from all seven countries on Trump's barred entry list who are currently traveling outside of this country. The impact on university personnel was felt most immediately after the executive order went into effect.

Two Iranian nationals who are associate professors at the University of Massachusetts at Dartmouth were detained Saturday upon arrival at Boston Logan International Airport. Today I talked with university officials in my district who have faculty members that need to return home in order to renew visas, but are afraid to leave. At another college, one-fourth of their applicants come from the countries that are impacted by this ban.

A constituent in East Brunswick, who is a non-Syrian political refugee, sits in limbo as only one of her four minor children passed through our already thorough and extensive processing and was approved for a visa. USCIS put a hold on the process of the remaining three due to lack of communication and direction and understanding from this travel ban.

By feeding off of fear, hatred, and bigotry, this administration's incendiary Muslim ban has created confusion, disruption, and chaos that is rippling around the world.

As our Federal agencies and international partners seek to understand and combat this meritless policy, I call on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, on which I sit, to hold an immediate hearing with leadership at the Department of Homeland Security to review concerning reports about the crafting and execution of this President's order.

I also requested that the House Homeland Security Committee, which I also serve on, to move up its February 7 hearing on this issue so that we may urgently address the national security implications of this administration's actions.

In short, Mr. Speaker, this is the United States of America. We respect diversity because this is a nation founded and made great because of immigrants. We are not going to stand by and allow President Trump, with his un-American ideals, to push forward on American policies. Understand that we will resist at every turn.

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.

H.R. 7 will make permanent the harmful and discriminatory Hyde amendment, penalizing small businesses who want to provide comprehensive health coverage to their employees and, once again, trampling on the District of Columbia by prohibiting the District from spending its own local funds for abortion coverage.

Yet again, the GOP has put our bodies and the choices we should get to make about them in the middle of a political firestorm. With every exhaustingly repetitive argument about when, how, and where a woman should be able to make those decisions, our country suffers.

If my Republican colleagues are so concerned about the life of a child, why isn't there priority to put forth a plan for public education? Why haven't we seen a comprehensive plan to continue the job growth that President Barack Obama started?

Their motives are transparent and I refuse to let this White House or any elected official play politics with women's bodies. As we continue down this dangerous road, today, tomorrow, and every day thereafter will be a day of resistance.

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to oppose this bill.

Mr. Speaker, we are in week 2 of this 115th Congress, and, as promised, my colleagues and I are here to stand up for this good Nation. Unfortunately, House Republicans cannot say the same.

Last night, they decided that nursing home coverage for millions of seniors, comprehensive health care for young children, and the benefits earned after a lifetime of hard work are not worth fighting for. That is exactly why the gentleman from Wisconsin offered an amendment to ensure that the budget resolution being considered today could not be used to cut benefits from three critically important programs: Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security.

In fact, the President-elect promised many times that he would neither cut Social Security benefits for seniors nor would he support cuts to Medicaid and Medicare. But the rule under consideration this morning fails to allow a debate or vote on this amendment, which places the earned benefits and the financial future of American people at risk.

Who are my Republican colleagues looking out for? Certainly not their constituents.

It is clear that we are faced with a Republican-controlled Congress that is ensuring the divided and self-serving rhetoric that echoed throughout this campaign season rings true. This is not democracy. This is not outlined in our Constitution. This is not the democracy we are sworn to protect.

With that, I urge my colleagues to reject this rule.