Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, much has been said about the tumultuous times in which we live, and it is true, we do face enormous challenges. But I would like to remind the American people of the things that will get us through these times.

My parents were part of the Greatest Generation. My father was a pilot in World War II, and I am honored to wear his Air Force wings. My mother was a mother of 10 amazing children, many of which are with me today. They are the best friends that I have ever had.

Our parents taught us something that each of us has embroidered and now hangs on our individual family walls, and it is this: Our family's motto is duty, honor, service to God, family, and country.

We are, as Abraham Lincoln said: ``The last best hope of Earth.'' That was true when he said it. It is still true today.

We created the miracle of the Constitution; we survived the catastrophe of the Civil War; we defeated communism, totalitarianism, fascism; we have the strength to get through the challenges that we face today. But it will only be true if we are true to that principle: Duty, honor, service to God, family, and country.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank Mr. Collins and Chairman Goodlatte for their work.

Mr. Chairman, I have to say, in listening to this debate, I can't imagine why anyone would oppose this legislation that is entirely designed to create transparency. This is good work that Chairman Goodlatte and Mr. Collins have worked on.

Last week we heard a number of shocking stories about government malfeasance, such as Chairman Goodlatte's investigation that the government had settled and revealed that the Obama Justice Department had funneled money to politically allied groups. We are grateful for that.

Today we are taking up H.R. 469, and I am thrilled that this legislation includes the text of my bill, the Judgment Fund Transparency Act.

As I said, the purpose of this act is really very simple. Actually, contrary to what has been said, it is to bring simplicity, it is to bring transparency. This bill would go a long way to providing our constituents and taxpayers a better idea of how their tax dollars are spent.

Heaven knows, and for heaven's sake, those of us here certainly know that sometimes the Federal Government makes mistakes. It is not perfect. It is prone to errors and it can cause harm to individuals. And when that happens, especially when these errors are particularly egregious, the government is sued and damages can be awarded.

Early on, in fact, this Congress spent a lot of its time doing nothing but that, sorting through claims and making appropriations to pay those claims. In fact, not even 100 years ago, much of this body's work was consumed only by

this topic. It wasn't until 1956 that Congress established the Judgment Fund and gave authority to the Treasury Department to resolve these claims in ``a permanent and indefinite appropriation.'' That has simply been abused.

In keeping with the law, the Treasury Department files a yearly report with Congress and maintains a web page that supposedly can be searched. That sounds good, but it doesn't work that way. It is cryptic and has otherwise limited information related to each payout that has made the data almost entirely worthless. There is no information on what the government did. There is no information on the claimant. We are all familiar with, for example, when the previous administration took $1.3 billion out of the fund and converted it to cash and delivered it to Iran.

Four years ago, The New York Times reported what was likely an illegal billion-dollar payout to farmers who had never even sued the government. This isn't just unacceptable, it is crazy. It is horrible government. It is what leads people to distrust the Federal Government.

It would require the Treasury to make payment out of this fund public, and it would include very simple things that common sense would simply demand.

This bill would name the agency. It would name the name of the plaintiff and the amount that they were paid, then a brief description of the facts around that claim.

Mr. Chairman, I will conclude by just saying the Judgment Fund Transparency Act may not prevent bad decisions by all government employees, but it will shine a light on decisions to the American people. It is about helping to increase trust between the American people and government, a government that we have given them reason not to trust. Let's bring in accountability and transparency to that.

Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this bill and the language found within this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for bringing up H.R. 469, which includes, as indicated, the text of my bill, the Judgment Fund Transparency Act.

The purpose of this act is really very simple. Actually, contrary to previous arguments, the rule of this and the intent of this is so simple. It is simply for government transparency. This bill will go a long way in providing our constituents and taxpayers a better idea of how their tax dollars are spent.

Now, heaven knows, and for heaven's sake, those of us here, we certainly know, the Federal Government isn't perfect. It is prone to errors that can cause harm to individuals or organizations from time to time, and when these errors are particularly egregious, the government is sued and damages are awarded to those who are harmed.

Early on, in fact, this Congress spent a large part of its time doing nothing but sorting through claims and making appropriations to pay those claims. In fact, not even 100 years ago, much of this body's work consumed only that topic, and it wasn't until 1956 that Congress established the Judgment Fund and gave authority to the Treasury Department to resolve these claims in ``a permanent and definite appropriation.'' That simply has been abused.

In keeping with the law's requirement to report on the fund from time to time, the Treasury Department files a yearly report of the Judgment Fund with Congress, and also maintains a web page that can be searched.

Now, this sounds good. Right? But the cryptic and otherwise limited information related to each payout has made the database almost entirely worthless. There is no information on what the government did wrong. There is no information on the claimant. In fact, journalists and transparency groups revealed in the last few months that from 2009 to 2015, the government paid out more than $25 million to unnamed or redacted recipients. A $25 million secret. We don't know who was paid, we don't know why they were paid, and, in some circumstances, we don't know how much they were paid.

Now, we are all familiar with the previous administration's decision to take $1.3 billion out of the fund, convert it to cash, and deliver it to Iran, yet this isn't the only egregious use of this fund.

Three years ago, The New York Times reported on what was likely an illegal billion-dollar payout to thousands of farmers who had never even sued the government. This isn't just unacceptable, it is crazy. It is horrible government. It is the type of thing that makes people resent the Federal Government.

This bill aims to clarify and to reduce that. It aims to clean up the ambiguity that exists between the current law and provide much-needed transparency. It would require the Treasury to make public any payment from the Judgment Fund and to include very simple things that common sense would surely demand: the name of the agency named in the judgment, the name of the plaintiff, the amount they were paid, any other fees such as attorneys' fees or interest, and then finally a brief description of the facts which led to the claim.

The Judgment Fund Transparency Act may not prevent bad decisions by all government employees or government agencies, but it will shine a light on those decisions to the American people. This is about helping to increase the amount of trust between the American people and a government that they simply don't trust. We give them reasons not to trust us. Let's bring accountability and transparency to that.

Mr. Speaker, I urge the House to vote ``yes'' on the rule and ``yes'' on passage of this crucial bill.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the gentleman from Arizona, who I consider a friend and one of the great leaders in the Congress, for leading this Special Order and for bringing this important matter before the Chamber.

2017 will go down as the worst wildfire season in history. My home State of Utah has definitely felt the effects. In June, the Brian Head fire burned more than 71,000 acres in my State. It burned for nearly a month, creating more than $36 million in damage. And that doesn't count the millions--indeed tens of millions of dollars it took to fight the fire.

While the fire was burning through my district, I was able to meet with local, State, and Federal leaders to take a tour of the fire and to survey

the damage and to try to find a solution. The images I saw as I toured this fire were truly heartbreaking. Dozens of evacuated homes, burned homes, ruined forests, firefighters and volunteers who were working day and night to try to contain the fire, ash-filled lakes.

I took more than an hour in a helicopter to fly around the circumference of this fire. As I was flying around looking down, thinking about, among other things, the wildlife that had been devastated by this fire, I wondered: How long will it take for us to recover from this, for this beautiful landscape to recover?

And I can promise you this, it will not happen in my lifetime.

My family owns a ranch, and almost 70 years ago, we had a similar fire. You can still see the scars from that fire, which is several generations now.

One incident manager told me: ``In 29 years of fighting fires, I have never seen a fire move so fast, burn so quickly and so hot that it could not be controlled or fought head-on.''

You have to wonder: Why is that?

The answer is very unfortunate. It is due to mismanagement.

Current mismanagement--and it is mismanagement--has left our forests vulnerable to insects and disease that make for a ripe forest for catastrophic fires. These heavy-handed regulations paralyze forest managers so they can't accomplish the critical tasks that are necessary for proper forest management.

This failure to treat high-risk areas and to remove hazardous buildup has left our land susceptible to fires that grow in size, severity, and cost.

So you have to ask yourself: What is the answer? How do we stop this? How do we stop it from happening again?

And the answer is really quite simple. Federal policies have contributed to recent catastrophic fires, and wildlife management begins with proper land management.

That is why I support Representative Westerman's bipartisan Resilient Federal Forests Act, which allows agencies to do this work so that we can prevent these catastrophic wildfires.

I look forward to the House passing this important legislation. Let us bring back the beauty of our forests. Let us bring back the health of our forests. Let us prevent these catastrophic fires that rage out of control.

I thank Mr. Gosar for bringing this again to the floor.

Mr. Speaker, today I want to address a topic of grave and tragic importance. Every 12 minutes in the United States we experience a suicide-related death; and, shockingly, for every suicide death, there are 25 attempts.

These are heartbreaking statistics and, sadly, they hit very close to home. In Utah, for example, we have the fifth highest rate of suicide deaths in the country. These are our neighbors, our coworkers, and, in some cases, our family and our friends.

I think that most of us, if not all of us, have been touched by some of these tragic stories, and I believe that we have a responsibility to do everything we can to help those in need. That is why I introduced the National Suicide Improvement Act earlier this year. This bill hopes to streamline and provide easy access to potentially lifesaving resources by designing a new, national three-digit dialing number similar to 911 for a national suicide prevention and mental health crisis hotline.

I believe this legislation has the ability to save lives and to benefit our loved ones who struggle with mental illness or suicidal thoughts. Let us do everything we can to help our fellow citizens who are in need, and that is what this legislation will do.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that I may hereafter be considered to be the first sponsor of H.R. 622, a bill originally introduced by Representative Chaffetz of Utah, for the purposes of adding cosponsors and requesting reprintings pursuant to clause 7 of rule XII.

Mr. Speaker, I stand today to honor my good friend, Jason Chaffetz, as he prepares to leave the House tomorrow.

On the day that I was first elected, the very first phone call I got was a number I didn't recognize. I picked it up, and it was Jason. He was the first person to call and congratulate me. He has become a close friend ever since.

But he has become more than a friend. He is a person who I trust. I go to him often for advice. I think he has the best political mind in all of Utah, and I am going to miss that.

I also appreciate his honesty and his integrity. Leaders take hits-- we understand that--and Jason has taken his share of arrows by those who may not agree with his positions. But no one has ever questioned his honesty or his integrity.

There is a great old movie called ``Grumpy Old Men.'' Jason will never be a star in that movie because he is one of the most optimistic, friendly, and positive people that I know. He always has a smile on his face.

So for those reasons, Jason, we are going to miss you. On behalf of all Utahns, I thank him for his service. On behalf of millions of Americans throughout the country, we wish him Godspeed in his adventures ahead.

Mr. Speaker, at its heart, this rule is about one thing. It is about taking power away from local officials, including local BLM officials, and moving that power to Washington, D.C., to faceless bureaucrats who sit in cubicles here in this city and make decisions that have enormous impacts upon families and upon individuals. In many cases, these bureaucrats have never been to the States, and may never be.

There is a county in my district that is 97 percent controlled by the Federal Government. I have two counties that are 90 percent controlled by the Federal Government. So many of the decisions that are made that impact these counties and these families are made in Washington rather than at the local level. That is what we are here today to talk about: this egregious consolidation and power by D.C. bureaucrats.

The Bureau of Land Management's final rule is exactly that--a snapshot of everything that is wrong with the previous administration. The rule is so flawed that a couple of administrative

fixes simply won't fix it. It has to be repealed.

The previous rule was on the book for decades. This rule was introduced and finalized in less than a year. Thousands of comments were intended to fix flawed reasoning in the rule. State and county commissioners' comments were largely ignored. Let's remember, those State and county commissioners represent the people. They understand the needs of the people.

Once again, 2.0 moves all of that decisionmaking out of the local office and back here to Washington, D.C. These D.C. bureaucrats don't have the on-the-ground knowledge of the situation; they don't know the land, they don't know the needs of the county, and they don't know the people.

That is not the only instance of diluting local voices. Planning 2.0 also undercuts the involvement of counties and other local government agencies by inviting distant voices to the planning table who would steer resource management plans away from multiple use early on in the planning process. This is a 180-degree turn from previous planning regulations.

Not only did 2.0 dilute local control, it also dilutes real local impacts. Let me explain what that means. When you look at local impacts instead of looking at the actual communities around where these decisions are being made, they can look out very broadly.

In my case, you look at a national park in Utah. They can look at the impacts of that and say, well, this has had a positive benefit, but that is because they may be looking at a community that is 100 miles away. They may be looking at St. George.

Why not look at Las Vegas? Why not look at Los Angeles and say, Oh, those communities are doing fine; the local economic impacts have been positive?

It is not a fair reflection of what is happening to the local communities. Once again, the local people, the local families.

While many lauded the BLM for giving this planning process an update--and I am glad that it did; it was necessary--they fell short of delivering a final rule that helps people. That is why I join in this effort to repeal it.

Mr. Speaker, I stand here today to recognize a true American hero, Utah veteran Billy Kirkbride, who was just awarded the Congressional Gold Medal.

Billy joined the Army in 1942, and he was chosen to be part of the unique program called the First Special Service Force which was the forerunner of today's Special Forces. It was here that he became a member of the very elite Devil's Brigade.

The Congressional Gold Medal is awarded to those who have performed amazing feats leaving permanent impacts upon American culture and history. As a former Air Force pilot, I know the sacrifice and the dedication that it takes to become one of America's elite warriors.

It is an honor to stand here today not just before the American people, but before his lovely wife and daughters to pay tribute to the sacrifice and dedication that Billy showed through his service to this great Nation.

He doesn't just represent the strength of the Armed Forces, he represents American values that continue to make our Nation great, and millions of us are grateful for his service.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my friend, the gentleman from Alabama, for giving me time to express the importance of repealing what has been one of the most destructive laws ever written.

The intent of ObamaCare was to make health care more accessible and more affordable and, in fact, has done exactly the opposite.

I have heard from hundreds of my constituents who tell me how it has impacted their lives. A friend of mine from Bountiful, their premiums have doubled--have doubled. A small business owner in the southern part of my district, who found they could not get insurance at all, their plan was entirely taken away.

This law was built on a foundation of deceptions. We were told: ``If you wanted to keep your doctor, you could keep them.'' We were told: ``If you wanted to keep your plan, you could keep it.'' We were told it would reduce costs by an average of $2,500 per family.

We now know that all of that is not true and that they knew at the time they passed this law that it was not true.

All of us want to take care of those who have preexisting conditions; all of us want to provide insurance to the uninsured. We can do better.

Mr. Speaker, I join with my colleagues in thanking my friend Mr. Smith for giving us this opportunity to address such an important and a deeply personal issue.

I am the proud father of six children, and nothing in the world means more to me. My life changed forever the first time I held my first son. I look at my sons and daughters, and I am humbled by the responsibility it is to be their parent, and I am touched always by the power and the blessing of life.

Now I am a grandfather, and that fact alone makes my life very good. This week we commemorate the anniversary of one of the most significant Supreme Court cases in the history of the United States, of course, Roe v. Wade.

We also welcome thousands of pro-life activists who came to our Nation's Capital to participate in the March for Life. Think about that title for a moment, the March for Life. It is extremely important as Members of Congress to stand up for those who do not have a voice to stand up for themselves, our precious unborn children.

Tomorrow the House will vote on H.R. 36, the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, which protects the lives of unborn by banning abortions at or after 20 weeks of pregnancy. With medical evidence that an unborn child is capable of experiencing pain by at least 20 weeks, if not earlier, I will support this bill, and I encourage my colleagues to support it as well. Think of what we would be saying if we were to reject this bill.

Now, I understand that there are exceptions, and I recognize the woman's health is just as important as her child. Thus, we made reasonable medical judgment exceptions, which would be made in the case of rape, incest, or an endangerment of the mother's life.

As I conclude, I would like to reiterate my opening remarks. Each life is sacred. Each life has a right to protection. I urge my colleagues to help to defend the innocent lives of America's unborn children and represent those who cannot represent themselves.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. Chair, I would like to be very clear: this debate is not about immigration. This debate is about something much more, much more important than that. This is a generational conflict over something that is very clear. It is not about Presidential prerogative or Presidential arrogance.

As a military officer for 14 years, I had the honor of serving my country. Prior to doing that, I took a sacred oath of office, which is very similar to the oath that all of us took last week, to defend the Constitution of the United States. That is what this legislation is about. That is why this piece of legislation is so important.

This legislation seeks to restore the balance of powers. It seeks to conform that vision that our Founding Fathers had, that miracle that was created in Philadelphia that summer. It seeks to conform and to preserve the principles that so many people have died for.

The President is not a king. Congress is tasked to create the law. That is what this legislation is about. That is why it is so important that we support it.

``. . . the President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted;--the person having the greatest number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, . . .''

Will the gentlewoman yield?

Madam Speaker, as my colleague from Washington has so ably noted, in areas where large tracts of land are part of the National Forest System, local school districts have relied in the past on timber harvesting receipts, shared with local governments, as an important source of revenue to support their school systems. This is a problem that was created by activists here in Washington, D.C.

When Federal policies dramatically reduced logging receipts from our national forests, those schools were hit very hard. That is why we created the Secure Rural Schools program. This is real. It affects real people. It affects real families. It has affected many people in my own State.

So I would like to ask my colleague: Are your local schools feeling the effects of a situation like mine?

Mr. Speaker, I am discouraged to stand here and to announce a milestone that we reached recently, a very discouraging milestone, and that was in the last few days we have now surpassed $18 trillion in debt. If you want to know how much money that is, take every American taxpayer, from the young man who just got his first job to every mother and father who are struggling to take care of their families, and give them a bill for $150,000. It is simply unsustainable.

If we continue down this current path, we will commit fiscal national suicide by our spending and our debt. Remember, a nation that is bankrupt cannot provide for the security of its people, a nation that is bankrupt cannot provide for the needy among them, and a nation that is bankrupt cannot provide for the children in the next generation.

Now is the time to restore fiscal sanity. We must have the courage to reclaim the American Dream. Tax reform, entitlement reform, and a balanced budget--we must have the courage to make these a reality. But we can fix this. We must fix this. I hope we will have the courage to do this, even if it is hard.