Floor Statements

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

Mr. Chairman, this is a simple, technical amendment that seeks to increase the maximum number of eligible entities authorized to participate in the competency-based demonstration project established by H.R. 3136 from 20 to 30.

As a former member of the Alabama State Board of Education and chancellor of Alabama's 2-year college system, I commend my colleague and fellow member of the Education and the Workforce Committee, Mr. Salmon of Arizona, for introducing this innovative legislation.

In today's world, we cannot continue to regard higher education as a one-size-fits-all process. As our economy continues to recover, higher education institutions continue to see a large influx of students who are seeking to further their education after years in the workforce.

At the same time, our K-12 school systems are becoming more innovative, incorporating cutting-edge technologies and allowing for dual-enrollment and workforce training opportunities prior to graduation.

For these reasons, many students are arriving at higher education institutions with a variety of different skills in place but must still complete a prerequisite amount of courses before earning a degree, regardless of their competency in certain areas of study.

Unfortunately, the cost of higher education continues to rise, as does student loan debt. The competency-based demonstration project authorized by H.R. 3136 will allow students to gear their financial aid towards actual learning opportunities, versus simply checking off courses that may not be applicable to their needs, and logging seat time.

My basic amendment would simply allow for a more full-bodied and diverse sample of participating institutions to ensure that this demonstration project creates a truly representative sample of higher education opportunities.

This increase should improve the ability to analyze how such an approach could affect flexibility for institutions, while providing a more personalized, cost-effective education for a variety of different students.

Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this commonsense amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman's comments. At this time, with America, we have so many opportunities before us, but we have to make sure that the people in our society, and the people that are coming through some difficult circumstances, have opportunities that didn't exist before.

These sorts of innovations provide opportunities for them and for institutions of higher education to figure out where we need to go in the future so that we deliver the product of higher education in the way it needs to be delivered and received by those that can benefit the most.

So I appreciate the gentleman's comments. I urge my colleagues to vote for this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today with sadness to remember an outstanding public servant and a model citizen, and a good personal friend of mine, Orange Beach City Councilman Al Bradley.

Councilman Bradley, or Al, as he always asked to be called, passed away at the hospital in Foley, Alabama, on July 17 due to health complications. Al was 64 years old.

A native of Texas but a huge University of Alabama football fan, Al and his family and his wife, Linda, owned a house in Orange Beach, Alabama, since 1993.

He was a certified public accountant, and often was described as the financial rock of Orange Beach, serving as the chairman of the city's finance committee for 6 years.

But Al had a true servant's heart. I saw it myself. He put in more time and effort on things for Orange Beach than just about anyone I know, and he never sought any recognition in return.

So to his wife, Linda, his three children, his grandchildren, whom I know he loved very much, I want you to know that you are in the thoughts and prayers of thousands of people in southwest Alabama. We will miss Al very much.

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

Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to introduce this amendment on behalf of my distinguished colleague and fellow member of the Natural Resources Committee, Representative Bill Flores of Texas.

The National Ocean Policy, created under Executive Order 13547, was signed by President Obama in 2010 and requires that various bureaucracies work together to essentially ``zone the ocean'' and the sources thereof, largely affecting the ways in which we utilize our ocean resources and impacting both our marine and inland economy.

You have heard of a land grab. This is an ocean grab.

This is a simple amendment. It says that none of the funds made available by this act can be used to implement, administer, or enforce this executive order.

This policy has large implications for our marine resources, but reaches much further than the ocean itself. Essentially, a drop of rain that falls on your land could cause the Federal Government to have jurisdiction over your property under the notion that this drop will eventually wind up in the ocean.

That the EPA, along with the Army Corps of Engineers, recently released a ``Waters of the U.S.'' rule which vastly expands the agency's jurisdiction under the Clean Water Act by redefining ``navigable waterways'' serves as an example. I commend the committee for including a provision in this bill barring the implementation of such a rule.

The National Ocean Policy not only restricts ocean and inland activities, but it deters the intended focus and finances of over 20 Federal agencies that meet as a part of the National Ocean Policy, a council that has no statutory authority to exist and no congressional appropriation.

Both the Natural Resources Committee and the Appropriations Committee have asked for detailed spending reports on this overreaching policy, and neither committee has yet to receive any information.

Numerous and varied industries will suffer as a result of this well- meaning but ill-conceived policy, including but not limited to agriculture, energy, fisheries, mining, and marine retail enterprises, to just name a few. This has the potential to be devastating for coastal communities such as in my district--a coastal district located on the Gulf of Mexico, where the previously mentioned industries play a critical role in our economy.

Those who are affected most by the policy won't have a say or any representation in the rulemaking process because there is no current system of oversight in place for the regional planning agencies created as an arm of the National Ocean Council. Much uncertainty remains regarding program implementation, its impact, the limits of its authority, and lack of true stakeholder involvement.

The President has indicated that he will use his pen and his phone to create policy against the will of Congress, and the National Ocean Policy is a perfect opportunity for him to do so.

I urge my colleagues to support this amendment to stop excessive regulation and protect our ocean and affiliated inland economies, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I would urge my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to read the amendment. It doesn't stop any group of people in any State or any coastal area in this country from working together to do the things they have to do to protect their waters and to use their waters. In fact, it frees them up, because, under this executive order that in this amendment we say we are not going to use the money from this bill to fund, they could be restricted.

In my coastal communities, we do meet together. The Federal Government is not a good partner. In fact, they have been a hindrance to our ability to our use waters. Because there are people in the Federal Government who, unfortunately, believe that the oceans belong to the government, not to the people.

We need to adopt this amendment for coastal communities throughout the United States of America so that we can protect the people's right to control their own oceans and their own waters so that fishermen and commercial uses and recreational uses of our waters are kept and preserved for communities throughout the country.

I urge my colleagues to vote for this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to remember and honor the life of a true American hero, Jeremiah Denton.

Jeremiah Andrew Denton, Jr. was born in Mobile, Alabama, on July 15, 1924. The oldest of three brothers, Denton attended Spring Hill College in Mobile before going on to attend the United States Naval Academy. After graduation, Denton began his 34-year naval career, where he eventually attained the rank of rear admiral.

Mr. Speaker, Jeremiah Denton made countless sacrifices throughout his life and military career, but none is greater than his steadfast courage and heroic efforts during the Vietnam War. After less than a month of service in Southeast Asia, Denton's aircraft was shot down, and he was captured on July 18, 1965.

Denton was held as a prisoner of war over the next seven years and seven months, spending time at various prisons across Vietnam, most notably the Hanoi Hilton. During his imprisonment, Denton was often held in solitary confinement, in dark, rodent infested rooms, where he was subjected to intense torture and starvation. Despite these excruciating conditions, Jeremiah Denton did not break.

In fact, Denton inspired his fellow prisoners to not succumb to the Vietnamese torture, but

to stand up to the enemy. That was a trademark of Jeremiah Denton--he never gave up the fight.

In his most memorable moment, Denton blinked the words ``torture'' in Morse code during a televised propaganda interview. This was the first time Americans and the world learned the extent of torture that American POWs were experiencing. Jeremiah Denton's bold, steadfast courage in the face of constant torture embodies the American spirit of perseverance against all odds.

Thankfully, Denton would later be released during diplomatic negotiations known as ``Operation Homecoming.'' Upon his return to American soil, Denton proudly declared: ``We are honored to have had the opportunity to serve our country under difficult circumstances. We are profoundly grateful to our commander-in-chief and to our nation for this day. God bless America.''

Denton went on to receive the Navy Cross, the Defense Distinguished Service Medal, the Navy Distinguished Service Medal, three Silver Stars, the Distinguished Flying Cross, and many other military honors.

Later in life, Denton became the first Republican elected to the United States Senate from Alabama since Reconstruction. In the Senate, he worked to combat the spread of communism and strengthen our nation's defense. He was a strong advocate for family values and a voice of reason in the Senate.

After his time in the Senate, Jeremiah Denton maintained a very modest life, offering counsel to others interested in public service, never wavering in his commitment to our great nation.

On May 28, 2014, America lost one of our finest heroes as Jeremiah Denton passed away at the age of 89.

Jeremiah Denton embodies what it means to be a public servant in every sense of the word. When his nation needed him, he always answered the call of duty and stood tall in the face of doubt and despair. He never once wavered in his commitment to serving our country, steadfastly enduring torture by the North Vietnamese.

It is often said that the measure of a man is not what he takes with him when he dies, but rather what he leaves behind. Jeremiah Denton left behind a remarkable example for future generations of what it means to be a great and proud American. He left behind a legacy that can never be filled.

We are proud to claim Jeremiah Denton as a native son of Mobile. I admire him for his passion for service, and I strive to emulate his example.

Mr. Speaker, it is with great respect that I honor the life of Senator Jeremiah Denton, not only today, but each and every day.

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

Mr. Chairman, this amendment seeks to strike all of the funding for the Department of Energy's Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy program. This program, under the Department of Energy, allows the government to invest millions of taxpayer dollars in high-risk research and development schemes for ``green energy'' projects to the tune, as we have heard already, of over $1.7 billion.

The government should not be subsidizing the research and development initiatives of individual companies. Competition and innovation have been key aspects of private sector success from day one in the energy sector and other parts of our economy, and the government should not take the role of a private investor.

For example, the EERE program facilitated a $2.5 million grant to Massachusetts-based TIAX LLC to work with Green Mountain Coffee to reduce the energy used in roasting coffee beans. The program has also allowed for millions of dollars to large chemical and auto companies, such as providing a subsidy to Ford Motor Company to develop a new sheet metal forming tool.

I have nothing against those companies, but why should the government

be picking and choosing winners and losers?

Every business has a bottom line which, in and of itself, is a direct incentive for developing methods for becoming more energy efficient and innovative. By subsidizing this small sector of the energy economy, which includes renewables such as solar and wind, and allows for such focuses as the weatherization of houses, we are essentially allowing DOE to spend millions of taxpayer dollars on unconventional energy initiatives and projects that place taxpayer dollars at risk and that are not likely to produce a return on investment.

We, as a Congress, have continuously stated the need for an all-of- the-above energy strategy but continued investment into the EERE program focuses on a small portion of a largely unproductive portion of the energy sector at the expense of the more traditional energy sources, such as fossil fuels and nuclear, that we have a proven, reliable track record on.

With regard to the national energy policy, the committee report even highlights the President's failure to adequately focus our resources on an all-of-the-above energy strategy stating that ``his fiscal year 2015 budget request, like its predecessors, instead seems more ideological than practical,'' cutting ``this country's most important energy sources in order to increase funding for energy efficiency and renewable energy programs.''

It goes on to say that:

As attractive as renewable energy may be, it will supply

only a mere fraction of this country's energy needs over the

next 50 years, and it presents considerable challenges to the

Nation's existing electric power grid, given its increasing

variability and uncertainty from supply and demand changes.

At a time when our economy continues to recover and many Americans continue to struggle to make ends meet, including paying their energy bills, we must focus on reasonable energy strategies that allow for the most affordable and reliable energy resources for consumers and businesses alike.

I am pleased that the committee has made reductions to this account in general. However, I believe that eliminating the energy efficiency and renewable energy program altogether under the Department of Energy will achieve all of our goals, while allowing savings to go towards the very important goal of reducing the deficit of this Nation.

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

Mr. Chairman, I respectfully disagree with the gentlewoman. The reason we have a deficit problem is because we are spending money we don't have, and this is a clear example of where we are spending money we don't have.

Even under the most optimistic projections for this year, we are going to run a $400-plus billion deficit, and we have got to start cutting in areas that may be good things or nice things, things we would like to do. We have got to start prioritizing our spending, and this is one place we can start.

Mr. Chairman, I would urge this House to adopt this amendment, to make a concrete step forward in reducing our deficit and not favoring certain companies in our economy over the others.

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

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Speaker, everywhere I go in my district, from the grocery store to town hall meetings, I hear the same thing over and over again. This President will not stay within the bounds of the Constitution of the United States or the laws passed by this body and the Senate, and it is time that we stand up to that.

That is why I join in support with the proposal by the esteemed Speaker of this House, the gentleman from Ohio, that this House bring a lawsuit to bring the President back within bounds. I do so reluctantly. I wish we didn't have to do that.

The President's response to this was to say: So sue me.

So, Mr. President, we will sue you--not because we want to but because we have to defend the Constitution you won't abide by and we have to protect the rights of the people of this country that you continue to transgress.

Madam Chair, I rise to engage in a colloquy regarding the Navy's littoral combat ship. The Navy's littoral combat ship represents the future small surface combatant for the United States Navy. This program is in its infancy, but has, so far, cleared many hurdles and is well on its way to becoming an integral part of the fleet.

The Navy reduced the budget request from four ships in fiscal year 2015, as they projected last year, to three ships. Mr. Chairman, your bill has further reduced the program to a recommended level of two ships.

Mr. Chairman, wouldn't you agree that the LCS is an important part of the Navy's future fleet?

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate your attention to this matter. I look forward to working with you and Ranking Member Visclosky, as well as Chairman Rogers, as we move toward conference.

The Navy has been unequivocal in its support for the LCS, and as you say, the LCS plays an extremely important role in the future of the Navy's fleet. It is vitally important the Congress not lose sight of that and that I not lose sight of the importance of this shipyard to my district.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to remember a friend and a great Alabamian, Mr. Charles McDowell Lee, Sr.

Mr. Lee, as he was commonly known, served as Secretary of the Alabama State Senate from 1963 to 2011. At the time of his retirement, McDowell Lee was the longest serving secretary of a legislative body in the entire nation. During my time as a state senator, I grew to know Mr. Lee as a brilliant mind and the unequivocal historian of the Alabama Legislature.

Mr. Lee, a native of Clio, Alabama, graduated from Barbour County High School in 1942 and went on to study at Auburn University. He answered the call of duty during World War II, serving in both the European and Pacific theaters. He then returned to Alabama to finish his education at Troy State Teachers College. After graduating, Mr. Lee was elected mayor of his hometown of Clio, earning the recognition as one of the youngest mayors in the nation.

Mr. Lee was elected to the Alabama House of Representatives in 1954, and he went on to serve in that position for eight years, earning the titles of ``Outstanding Freshman'' and ``Best Debater'' by the Alabama Press Association. In 1963, he was selected as Secretary of the Alabama Senate.

He would go on to serve as Secretary of the Senate for 47 years. During that span, Mr. Lee worked with ten different governors and hundreds of state senators. He was known nationally as an expert scholar on parliamentary procedure and received countless state and national awards for his years of public service.

Every morning that the State Senate was in session, a number of other senators and I would gather in Mr. Lee's office to drink coffee and get his input on current events. It was in those candid conversations with Mr. Lee that I truly learned how the State Senate worked and gained a deep appreciation for the unique rules that govern legislative bodies.

In a legislative body where emotions and politics sometimes get the best of us, Mr. Lee provided calm, unbiased leadership and direction. He respected the rules and the institution, and through that each senator quickly grew to respect him.

Mr. Lee passed away on April 17, 2014, at the age of 89. He is survived by his wife, Hazel; his sons Arch, Charles Jr., and Kenneth; his daughters Margaret and Josie Lee; and a number of grandchildren and great grandchildren. I know his family must miss him very much, but they can find peace in the countless individuals' lives that McDowell Lee improved, mentored, and impacted in his lifetime.

Mr. Speaker, I find it only fitting to recognize this great American in this body, the People's House, for his dutiful service to our nation and immense respect for the legislative process.

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. Chairman, I was going to submit an amendment today regarding surveys on the red snapper in the Gulf of Mexico, but instead, I rise to engage Chairman Wolf in a colloquy.

I am pleased that the committee has recognized in its committee report the shortcomings of current methods used by NOAA fisheries to conduct stock assessments, specifically affirming the inadequacy of generated data, infrequency of surveys, and the insufficient use of independent research in developing these stock assessments.

However, I am inclined to stress that further efforts must be taken to address the agency's faulty data. In the Gulf of Mexico, for example, stock assessments meant to provide data for the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council's Reef Fish Management Plan, which includes the red snapper, do not include data retrieved from reef structures on which these fish live and thrive, nor do they acknowledge that reef structures, both natural and artificial, are even relevant to conducting stock assessments.

I have personally spent time with scientists from the Gulf Coast, including scientists from the University of South Alabama and the Dauphin Island Sea Lab and have seen for myself the overabundance of fish which live on these reefs, of which there are 17,000 off the coast of Alabama alone.

Last Friday, Congressman Scalise and I went out and fished in the Gulf of Mexico. It took us 45 minutes to go out. We fished for 15 minutes and caught our limit, and it took 45 minutes to go back. Those reefs are absolutely filled with fish.

Today, stock assessment data provided by NOAA fisheries has proven unreliable, and it has helped result in a broken management system. Just in March of this year, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia found that the NOAA survey process and the data is totally insufficient. That was a finding of a court in a court case.

In my district, we will experience, as a result of that, a 9-day red snapper season this year, starting June 1 and ending June 9, despite the fact that these fish are so abundant it is difficult to catch anything else.

In short, current stock assessments generated by NOAA fisheries lack the ability to adequately determine whether overfishing has occurred or to inform fishery managers how to prevent overfishing from occurring in the future.

I join the committee in calling for greater accountability over NOAA fishery stock assessments. It is simply insufficient, and they are not being responsive to the needs of the fisheries.

If NOAA fisheries are to receive a Federal appropriation at all for scientific data collection, it must prove that it will vastly improve the methods with which it conducts stock assessments, including taking into account the relevant habitats and biological features of the stock in question, and produce a stock assessment that can truly account for our fishery resources.

I appreciate the gentleman's attention to this matter, and I thank him for his time.

I yield to the gentleman from Virginia.

I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to highlight the government's backdoor funding of abortions through grants to abortion provider Planned Parenthood. Forty-five percent of the organization's entire revenue, totaling roughly $540 million in 2013, was provided directly by the American taxpayer through government grants.

Planned Parenthood performed 327,000 abortions in 2012. Planned Parenthood states in its own budgetary report for 2013:

We are the most effective advocate in the country for

policies that protect access to abortion.

My constituents find the practice of abortion morally abhorrent and threatening to the social fabric of this country, and they should not be forced to subsidize abortions nationwide.

I call on this body to respect the conscience of millions of Americans by ending the practice of government funding for abortions.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in this House on Ash Wednesday to talk about a problem that should be heavy on the hearts of everyone in this body and around the Nation, and that is the persecution of Christians around the world.

Millions of Christians will start their Lenten period of fasting and penitence today, and over the next several weeks will act out their faith leading up to Holy Week, when we remember the death and crucifixion of Jesus, and then the feast of Easter, his resurrection.

Sadly, in too many parts of the world, Christians will not be allowed to openly profess their faith and act out the things that for centuries Christians have been able to do.

This chart on my left, which was prepared by the Pew Research Center, shows that around the world there is religious persecution, but it is particularly bad in Asia and, sadly, in the Middle East, the very part of the world where Jesus came from.

This next chart from the same source shows that the problem is getting worse, not better. Sadly, we are seeing that the perpetrators are now more frequently governments than private individuals in these countries. The bottom part of this chart tells us the saddest news of all: the most likely people in the world to be persecuted for their religious beliefs are Christians. This is a little-known fact to many people. For some reason, the news media has not been willing to cover it as well as they should have been, but perhaps during this season of Lent in preparation for Easter, it is a time when all of us can understand that this is a real problem, a humanitarian problem, a problem for the rights and freedoms of people all over the world.

Now, there is something we can do about it, but we need to understand the problem more specifically to do so.

This last chart perhaps is the most troubling of all. In 1914, Christians made up about 20 percent of the entire population of the Middle East. By 2013, they made up only 4 percent. In Iraq since 2003, almost a million Christians have fled that country. Since the troubles began in Syria in 2011, half a million Christians have fled. In Egypt since the troubles there in 2011, 100,000 Coptic Christians have left that country.

Now, if you look at what is happening in Iraq and Egypt, that should be of particular concern to us because we will send this year to each of those two countries in aid over $1 billion. That is taxpayer money that has been brought to our government and that we send to those countries from the people of the United States of America. I believe we should exercise a different foreign policy. Not only should we state that we are going to stand up for the protection of religious minorities around the world that are persecuted, but in countries like Iraq and Egypt where we send hundreds of millions of dollars of aid, we should demand it, and we should demand it not just because we are a country in which the majority of people are Christians but because it is the right thing to do, and we have historically done that as a Nation.

As we go toward Holy Week and people around the world remember that Jesus Christ himself was persecuted to death, and for centuries thereafter throughout the Roman Empire, throughout what we today call the Middle East, Christians were persecuted, we need to make sure that the clock is not going to be rolled back, as it clearly is today. The United States of America, our President, our Secretary of State, this body, the entire Congress, and the American people should do what we have traditionally done, and that is to stand up for the rights of people around the world. In this particular context, that means standing up for Christians who are being persecuted and killed merely because of their beliefs.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in recognition of National Marriage Week.

Every year, in the lead-up to Valentine's Day, we recognize the importance of the institution of marriage and the stability it brings to the American household. Married couples lead longer lives, have greater financial and emotional stability, and are healthier and generally happier than their unmarried counterparts. However, only 52 percent of adults in America are married today--a steep decline from 80 percent in 1970.

Children who grow up in a two-parent household generally perform better in school, stay out of trouble, and are on track to live a healthier and happier life. Yet today, over 40 percent of babies are born out of marriage, compared to only 5 percent in 1960.

I have been married to my wife, Rebecca, for 32 years. We have enjoyed raising our four wonderful children together, the oldest of whom is now married himself.

I believe promoting the positive benefits of marriage is important for the happiness, stability, and well-being of the next generation. I am proud to recognize National Marriage Week, and I am honored to be married to Rebecca and be the father of Patrick, Kathleen, Laura, and Colin.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today with a heavy heart to remember the life of Colonel

(U.S. Army Retired) William Callender of Mobile, Alabama. Colonel (U.S. Army Retired) Callender, known affectionately to his family as `The Colonel,' passed away on January 17, 2014, and was laid to rest in Pine Crest Cemetary in Mobile on January 22.

An avid Alabama Crimson Tide football fan, Colonel (U.S. Army Retired) Callender, was born in Mobile on September 17, 1937, graduating from Murphy High School in 1956 and the University of Alabama in 1960. He was married to his wife, Jacqueline, in 1958 and began his career in military service directly after his college graduation in 1960.

Colonel (U.S. Army Retired) Callender was sent to serve in Vietnam, earning a Purple Heart, Distinguished Flying Cross, the Soldier's Medal and the Gallatry Cross with Bronze Star Medal. He was truly an American hero, selflessly putting himself in harm's way to protect the lives of his peers.

But Colonel (U.S. Army Retired) Callender's service continued even after his multiple tours in Vietnam, becoming known in South Alabama for his work on behalf of America's military veterans and earning the Gulf Coast Veteran of the Year Award in 2006. After retiring from the U.S. Army, Colonel (U.S. Army Retired) Callender began working at the University of South Alabama in Mobile, as well as serving on the Baldwin County School Board.

Upon his full retirement, he and his wife Jacqueline moved to Orange Beach, Alabama, serving on the Battleship Commission and enjoying his much-deserved retirement fishing. He will be greatly missed by his family--his wife, Jacqueline, his three daughters Ginger Hawkins, Cyndi Callender and Tammy Hadley, and his 12 grandchildren and 8 great- grandchildren.

South Alabama lost a great man on January 17 with the passing of Colonel (U.S. Army Retired) Callender. We thank him for his service and remember him for his courageous spirit fighting to defend our country.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor a young man who is representing our community in South Alabama in the Senior Bowl, Jay Prosch. Jay is a fullback at Auburn University, having originally attended UMS Wright in Mobile, AL, before playing college football at Auburn.

Jay is an exceptionally talented young individual. While serving as Team Captain his senior year at UMS Wright, he received the Joe Bullard, Jr. Award, given to the player who displays exemplary leadership and love of the game of football.

In addition, Jay was awarded the Most Valuable Linebacker Award, Mobile Optimist Club Offensive Back of the Year Award, and State of Alabama 4A Lineman of the Year Award. That year, his senior year, he recorded 199 tackles, 114 solo stops, 16 of which were for a loss, five pass interruptions, and one sack. He also rushed five times for 16 yards and one touchdown as a fullback.

Jay has become a standout at Auburn and previously during his time at the University of Illinois as a standout in strength training. He clean lifted more than 400 pounds while weighing just 250. He was also recorded at 4.72 seconds in the 40-yard dash.

CBS Sports named him a ``Freak,'' as well as Gil Brandt listing him as one of the country's Top 100 Seniors this year.

We are all so proud of Jay and his accomplishments on the field of play. He has excelled as a player, a leader, and an individual, and is regarded as a leader by his teammates and coaches. South Alabama is proud to claim him as one of our own, and we wish him luck as he takes the field in the Senior Bowl.

Mr. Speaker, last week I was sworn in as the newest Member of this body. As my very first legislative act, I have announced my cosponsorship of the American Health Care Reform Act, a bill that will repeal the destructive ObamaCare law and replace it with conservative, market-based solutions.

ObamaCare is hurting families across south Alabama, causing dropped coverage, skyrocketing premiums, and adding to the debt when we just can't afford it. It is becoming painfully obvious for families and small businesses in this country that this law is not working, and that it simply cannot be fixed.

We have a responsibility in this body to do what is right for the American people, and it is urgent and obvious we must act now to end this unworkable law.

To my colleagues on the other side: I respect you and stand ready to work with you to replace this law with solutions that will actually lower costs and provide quality care for all of the people in America.