Floor Statements

Mr. Chair, I thank Chairman Frelinghuysen as well as Chairman Simpson for their hard work on this package of bills.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 5895, which includes the fiscal year 2019 Energy and Water Development Appropriations bill.

Of all the funding bills I work on with my colleagues on the Appropriations Committee, the Energy and Water legislation is one of the most important for my district of central Washington.

From supporting the continued cleanup efforts at the Hanford nuclear site to boosting the groundbreaking scientific research conducted at the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, to aiding the vitally important water projects managed and developed by both the Army Corps of Engineers as well as the Bureau of Reclamation, this bill is composed of important resources for central Washington.

Regarding Hanford, I am proud this bill restores more than $200 million from the President's request for the Richland office to continue providing for continued safe and effective cleanup operations onsite.

I am also pleased with the restoration of more than $40 million to the Office of River Protection to continue important work on the 56 million gallons of radioactive nuclear waste that is stored at the site.

I remain steadfast in my commitment to holding the Federal Government accountable to its moral and legal obligation to the cleanup of the Hanford site, and this bill does precisely that, so thank you.

I am also encouraged by this legislation's demonstrated commitment to

moving forward with Yucca Mountain as the lead geological repository for legacy waste and spent nuclear fuel, as well as the continued commitment to support science, including robust funding for Basic Energy Sciences, cybersecurity, and the National Nuclear Security Administration. These programs are important for the groundbreaking work conducted at PNNL to tackle some of the most challenging problems in energy, the environment, and in national security.

Finally, this legislation includes a provision that I authored to stop the dangerous, antiscience forced spill order currently in effect on the eight lower Snake and lower Columbia River dams, which began in early April of this year.

Just a week ago, Mr. Chairman, we received news from the Army Corps that fish managers are having to take measures to manage the effects of this reckless spill order. High flow rates from the forced spill are causing fish to stall in their migration upstream, with only 300 to 400 spring chinook passing through Little Goose Dam in late May. However, after the Corps reduced the spill rate by just 20 percent a week ago, the daily passage rose to 2,689 fish. This demonstrates the strain the spill order is placing on our endangered species.

Some of my colleagues refuse to acknowledge this unambiguous scientific data and claim to support endangered fish species with their words.

Mr. Chair, they claim to support the endangered species with their words but not with their actions.

I am proud to have advocated for the inclusion of this language to stop this misguided spill to help save our fish and save our dams.

I urge a ``yes'' vote on H.R. 5895.

Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment, although I am not opposed to it.

Mr. Chair, I appreciate my colleague's support for the DOE's efforts to take action on the defense-related uranium mines that are a

legacy of the Cold War. The amendment does not change funding levels within the bill, and I do not oppose the amendment.

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

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Arizona.

Mr. Chairman, although I am supportive of the stated goals of the National Ocean Policy, such as more interagency coordination and decisionmaking, there are many troubling aspects here.

This amendment seeks to strip underlying language that prevents Federal agencies from using ambiguous authorities in the National Ocean Policy to encroach on a wide variety of ocean and inland activities.

I have heard from farmers and irrigators from throughout the Pacific Northwest concerned that ill-defined terms such as ``ecosystem-based management'' give broad authority to Federal agencies to adversely impact terrestrial agriculture that is hundreds of miles from the Pacific Coast in the name of ocean management.

Before imposing these burdens on farmers who feed our Nation, it is necessary for Congress to evaluate such a policy to ensure that all affected stakeholders have a seat at the table. I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment.

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

Mr. Chairman, I rise to offer an amendment on a critical matter for the Bonneville Power Administration and our Nation's other power marketing administrations, or PMAs, including the Southwestern Power Administration and the Western Area Power Administration, as well as the Tennessee Valley Authority, or the TVA.

The President's fiscal year 2019 budget request, released earlier this year, included a misguided proposal to sell the transmission assets of these entities. It is unfortunate this proposal was offered once again, as the matter was met with resounding rejection by Congress last year when it was offered in the fiscal year 2018 budget request.

The sale of these assets would result in the Federal Government abandoning a successful and efficient solution for providing affordable power to rural, urban, and tribal communities across the country.

This one-time Federal debt reduction proposal would create energy production and delivery issues for my constituents, as costs would inevitably rise.

Mr. Chairman, this ill-advised proposal is once again a Federal attempt to fix something that is not broken.

I fully support efforts to improve energy infrastructure across the Nation. However, I do not believe that this goal should come at the expense of existing infrastructure--infrastructure that successfully fills a need where market-based pricing would not be sustainable.

My constituents, especially in rural communities, depend on the Bonneville Power Administration to provide stable and affordable electricity service. Divesting BPA's assets would create needless uncertainty for regional energy markets and ratepayers in central Washington.

In a climate where BPA continues to face unnecessary challenges, whether from the imprudent Federal proposal to move to market-based rates or the incessant use of litigation brought forward by radical environmentalists for the past three decades, I offer this amendment which simply prohibits any funds from being used to sell the transmission assets of the three PMAs and the TVA.

Mr. Chairman, I come before the House today as a champion for the Bonneville Power Administration, an advocate for public power, and a steadfast representative for ratepayers across central Washington State, the greater Pacific Northwest, and the entire Nation. I encourage the administration to listen to this resounding bipartisan message that I bring along with my colleagues today: we reject this proposal and prohibit the divestment of these assets.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentlewoman from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn).

Mr. Chairman, I am proud my amendment is cosponsored by at least 18 bipartisan colleagues, and I would humbly urge the rest of my colleagues to support and vote ``yes'' on this amendment.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize and congratulate Karen McGinnis on her retirement.

For the past 20 years, Karen has served as the director for what is known as the Hazardous Materials Management and Emergency Response Federal Training Center, or HAMMER, which is in my district at the Hanford Site in Richland.

I have personally visited and can truly say HAMMER is a one-of-a-kind facility. I have witnessed the hands-on training they provide to Federal employees, like Hanford workers and emergency responders who are deployed throughout our Nation. The services they provide to the Tri-Cities community and the country are essential.

Karen has worked to strengthen HAMMER's partnerships with Federal and State agencies, Tribes, safety professionals, and community leaders. She focuses on worker health and preparedness, and she has a passion for employee safety. Her leadership has made HAMMER one of the premier training centers in the world. As director, Karen has facilitated the training that makes it possible for the Federal Government to fulfill its obligation to clean up the Hanford Site.

I thank Karen for her dedication to HAMMER, and I wish her the best in her retirement.

Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the chairman for this opportunity to discuss a matter of great interest and importance to the Tri-Cities community in my district.

In the 1940s and 1950s, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers acquired land along the shoreline of the Columbia River in Tri-Cities, Washington. The land, 34 miles of the McNary shoreline, is currently underutilized. The local communities continue to be saddled with hundreds of thousands of dollars of M&O costs annually for upkeep of land of these shoreline properties that they don't even own.

I support the community proposal to convey the land back to the cities. I have been working with the chairman on proposed amendment language to do so but respect the fact the chairman has let me know there is still some work to be done.

I continue to encourage further community engagement and believe public meetings are necessary to ensure all voices are heard, including that of the local Tribes.

It is also a requirement that the city governments fully understand the responsibilities and potential costs that could arise from having this land conveyed.

There must be further coordination between conveyance proponents, community stakeholders, city governments, and the Army Corps.

Mr. Chairman, you have raised concerns about the language in its current form and have urged further efforts. I am committed to continuing to work with the local communities to address these concerns.

Therefore, Mr. Chairman, I respectfully ask: Will you commit to continuing to work with me as the NDAA process moves forward to try to address concerns with the proposal while the communities continue to assess their needs?

I yield to the gentleman from Texas.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the chairman for that colloquy.

Mr. Speaker, on May 19, we recognized Armed Forces Day. This is a day set aside to honor the brave men and women serving in the U.S. military across the country.

In central Washington, this day was celebrated by the Ephrata community at an event put on by the American Legion. The annual Nacho/ Taco Feed and Dessert was first started by 9-year-old Justin Pederson, who wanted to help veterans in the area take the Honor Flight to Washington, D.C.

I have had the distinct honor to welcome Honor Flight veterans from central Washington, and it was an opportunity that I will never forget. The Honor Flight enables veterans from World War II, the Korean war, and the Vietnam war, to visit the memorials that have been erected for their service.

I want to thank Justin and the American Legion in Ephrata for their work to support the Honor Flight. Spending the afternoon learning about the once in a lifetime experiences from local veterans is an excellent way to recognize military members. I look forward to greeting more veterans from Washington in the future.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in honor of the brave men and women in blue who serve and protect us each and every day.

This week is National Police Week, but we owe constant gratitude to these individuals who risk their lives to enforce the law and protect families across the United States. Law enforcement officers take time away from their families and their loved ones, often without the thanks they deserve and often putting themselves in harm's way.

This week, we remember the officers who are currently serving, like Aaron Trombley from the Tri-Cities in my district, who was selected as the Washington State Trooper of the Year. We also remember those who have lost their lives in the line of duty.

In January of this year, Deputy Daniel McCartney of the Pierce County Sheriff's Department in Washington was shot and killed after responding to a burglary, leaving behind a wife and three young children. Deputy McCartney and all of the other fallen officers will not be forgotten for their sacrifice.

I want to personally thank the police and sheriffs' departments, Washington State Patrol, and all the Federal officers who keep central Washington's communities safe. This week and every day, we offer our appreciation and respect for law enforcement officers across the Nation.

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 900 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.

General Leave

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.

Mr. Speaker, on Wednesday, the Rules Committee met and reported a rule, House Resolution 900, providing for further consideration of a very important piece of legislation for America's farmers and ranchers: H.R. 2, the Agriculture and Nutrition Act, commonly referred to as the farm bill. The rule provides for consideration of H.R. 2 under a structured rule, allowing for consideration of 31 amendments that were offered.

Mr. Speaker, earlier this year, I traveled to every county in my district for one reason: to listen, to hear, and to get the input and the concerns from farmers, ranchers and producers across central Washington State. I traveled to Pateros, where my constituents discussed the vital need for strengthening market access and opening new sources for exporting across the globe.

I visited with farmers from East Wenatchee in Douglas County who discussed the importance of commodity sourcing and stressed the need for stronger education for the public about farming and where the food that lands on our tables comes from.

I heard from constituents in Prosser and Benton and Yakima Counties who stressed the importance of agricultural research from producers in Quincy, who shared their personal stories of the impacts of crop insurance on their livelihoods, and from farmers in Othello who raised concerns regarding regulatory burdens on the agricultural community.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to rise today to say that this farm bill makes great strides in addressing these challenges that face America's farmers. The rule we bring before the House provides for further consideration of the underlying legislation, H.R. 2, the Agriculture and Nutrition Act, a bill that is critically important to my district in central Washington and to rural districts just like it across the country.

As a farmer myself and as a former State agricultural director, I know how important these farm policies are when it comes to our agricultural economy. This farm bill strengthens the farm safety net to help America's farmers and ranchers compete.

After 5 years of depressed prices, and a 52 percent drop in farm income, our farmers need us--they need Congress--to reauthorize these important programs.

Mr. Speaker, while American farmers have faced these depressed prices and severe drops in farm income, we, luckily, have a robust safety net in place. Due to the previous 2014 farm bill, our agriculture community was able to hold on and continue to provide American consumers with food in our grocery stores, in our schools, and in our food banks.

It is incumbent upon us to ensure these policies continue. We must pass this farm bill and ensure a steady food supply will be on the shelves and in our markets for the years to come.

The underlying legislation includes the creation of a new international market program, which I would argue is more important today than ever before. Programs within it, including the Market Access Program and the Foreign Market Development Program, are incredibly important to producers seeking to maintain and expand their export markets for U.S. agricultural products and commodities. The Market Access Program, on its own, is a net positive program, which for every $1 spent, $28 is returned to the American economy.

I know these critical trade and export resources are at the top of the minds of American farmers and producers across the country, and we must continue to ensure their availability and access for the agricultural industry.

This bill also maintains and strengthens the Nation's nutrition programs to assist those who struggle to put food on the table, while providing critical training to help people attain the skills necessary to gain good-paying jobs, financial self-sufficiency, and better futures for themselves and their families. It supports the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, without any cuts in funding. Instead, this bill adds further funding and empowers States with the flexibility on how to best administer their respective programs.

The State of Washington has done innovative work in their administration of SNAP through the BFET and the RISE programs to help some of the most vulnerable populations, and I am pleased that this farm bill will allow these programs to continue if the State so chooses.

This legislation contains employment and education provisions for those who need a hand up due to falling on hard times.

Mr. Speaker, the farm bill contains comprehensive approaches to farm policy, nutrition, trade, conservation, crop insurance, regulatory reform, rural development, animal health, specialty and organic crops, and provisions to help beginning farmers and ranchers.

This rule provides for further consideration of amendments offered by our colleagues in the House on a great variety of these issues. I look forward to listening to the robust debate on potential provisions to strengthen this legislation.

As this is the first farm bill I have had the opportunity to engage in since being in Congress, I welcome input from my colleagues on both sides of the aisle and from every perspective. We must continue to bring forward solutions for America's farmers, ranchers, rural communities, and families.

Mr. Speaker, this body, the people's House, is made up of many walks of life. We have physicians. We have attorneys. We have ordained ministers. We have engineers, school administrators, former State and local government officials, scientists, and law enforcement officials. Today, I am proud to come before you as a farmer. I am not the only one.

There are maybe about 20 farmers, ranchers, and producers in the House, in the people's House. Among us are an almond farmer from central California, a blueberry farmer from the State of Maine, a rancher from South Dakota, a cattleman from Kentucky, a rice farmer from Minnesota, and, yes, a proud hops farmer from the Yakima Valley from the State of Washington.

I am privileged to come before you in support of this rule and the underlying legislation, H.R. 2, the Agriculture and Nutrition Act. I humbly urge my colleagues to support the rule, support the bill, and strengthen the future for America's farmers and all of those who depend on them.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, the chairman of the House Agriculture Committee, Mr. Conaway, and I have worked together on many issues, and I know that he recognizes that the trade promotion programs that I referenced in my opening remarks are vital to our agricultural economy.

For decades, USDA export development programs like MAP have helped American farmers create, expand, and maintain access to foreign markets. Throughout their history, this successful public-private partnership has cultivated hundreds of billions of dollars in exports and created millions of American jobs both in the agricultural sector and in support industries, as well as the program brings a return to the United States economy.

In the findings of the underlying bill, it states: ``United States export development programs significantly increase demand for United States agricultural products . . . generating a return of $28 in added export revenue for each invested program dollar.''

Additionally: `` . . . our global competitors provide substantially more public support for export promotion than is provided to United States agricultural exporters.''

We are at a competitive disadvantage when it comes to the rest of the world when it comes to agricultural trade.

Mr. Speaker, without these private contributions and the private sector's resolve to support our export programs, it is very likely that the U.S. would not be the net agricultural exporter of the highest quality products that we are today. I think it is time that we look at our export promotion programs and take a serious look if we want to continue our exporting success.

Mr. Speaker, I introduced a bill to grow the investment in the MAP and FMD programs and I also offered an amendment that would have made a smaller investment in the MAP and FMD programs, and while we are not considering those amendments today, I am grateful that Chairman Conaway has agreed to come and engage in this important issue.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Conaway), the chairman of the House Agriculture Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Conaway for his commitment to continue working on this important issue, and I look forward to working with him.

Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Woodall), and I ask unanimous consent that he may control that time.

Mr. Chair, I claim time in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. Chair, I rise in strong opposition to the Russell amendment, which, if enacted, would have a detrimental impact on producers across our Nation, including many of my wine, grape, and hops producers, as well as the beer and wine industry, not only in my State, but around the country.

This amendment proposes to eliminate wine, distilled spirits, beer, and other alcohol products from the Value Added Producer Grant program administered by the USDA.

These industries, in my State and, quite frankly, across the Nation, are a growing segment of our farm economy, providing thousands of jobs.

It is also important to point out the growing significance of wine and hops exports to their industries. Last year, my State exported $28 million of wine, representing about 5 percent of our total production.

In my home valley of the Yakima Valley in the State of Washington, we account for 75 percent of the U.S. production of hops. With the continued boom of microbreweries and the demand for hops, we must ensure we have available markets.

Our wine grape growers and the wine industry continue to face challenges in export markets, such as the recent tariffs placed on our products by China.

We are in an environment with potential changes in international trade, and farmers are looking for more export markets.

Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to oppose any efforts to limit our farmers' ability to find markets for their products.

Mr. Chair, I include these letters of support in the Record: one from the Wine Institute, Wine America, Distilled Spirits Council, and the Brewers Association; and one from the Specialty Crop Farm Bill Alliance.

May 17, 2018.

Re Oppose Russell Amendment to the Farm Bill.

Dear Representative: We write on behalf of the nearly 9,000

small, family owned wineries, 6,200 small and independent

breweries and approximately 1,700 distilleries spread across

rural America to urge you to vote against the Russell

Amendment to the Farm Bill.

This amendment would unfairly target a vibrant and growing

segment of U.S. agriculture by seeking to block small

wineries, breweries and distilleries from participating in

USDA's value-added agriculture marketing grants. Combined,

the American

wine, brewing and spirits industries have a direct economic

impact of $287 billion on the United States economy and

support more than 5 million jobs nationwide.

Wineries, distilleries and breweries in America represent

the very epitome of value-added agriculture, bringing quality

jobs and generating much needed tourism to farming

communities across the country. This amendment would make it

harder for these communities to benefit fully from this

opportunity.

We urge you to support these small businesses and their

communities buy opposing the Russell Amendment.

Sincerely,

Robert P. Koch,

President & CEO, Wine Institute.

James Trezise,

President, WineAmerica.

Robert D. Pease,

President & CEO, Brewers Association.

Mark Gorman,

SVP Government Relations, Distilled Spirits Council.

Mr. Chair, we should not be singling out key agricultural industries under programs like this. We should not be picking winners and losers among our farmers.

Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to strongly oppose the Russell amendment.

Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Maine (Ms. Pingree).

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

Mr. Chair, I believe I have the right to close, so I would reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, I have one speaker. I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Lucas).

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

Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the gentlewoman from Wyoming for yielding me time.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of amendment No. 20 offered by my friend Ms. Cheney, and I am a proud cosponsor, as well, of this amendment.

This amendment would provide resources for ranchers that are facing unforeseeable events, like natural disasters.

In my district, particularly in the northern counties of north- central Washington, where catastrophic wildfires are becoming far too common an occurrence, ranchers can be forced off of their allotments due to wildfires causing their land to be unsuitable for grazing. When these ranchers are forced off of these allotments due to these external factors, they have nowhere to take their livestock.

This amendment will provide a solution to this problem by allowing these ranchers to take their livestock to vacant allotments in the event they face one of these unfortunate but all too common occurrences.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to urge my colleagues to support amendment No. 20, and I thank my colleague Ms. Cheney for her leadership on this issue.

Mr. Speaker, by the direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 879 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.

General Leave

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.

Mr. Speaker, on Tuesday, the Rules Committee met and reported a rule, House Resolution 879, providing for consideration of an important piece of legislation, H.R. 3053, the Nuclear Waste Policy Amendments Act of 2018. The rule provides for consideration of this measure under a structured rule, making three amendments offered by the minority in order. This legislation passed out of the Energy and Commerce Committee on an overwhelmingly bipartisan basis by a vote of 49-4, and has been a comprehensive effort spearheaded by my colleague from Illinois (Mr. Shimkus) over several Congresses.

Mr. Speaker, in 39 States and in 121 communities across this country, including in the Tri-Cities community in my home district, in the great State of Washington, the Federal Government continues to fail to meet its obligation to collect and dispose of spent nuclear fuel and high- level radioactive waste. This spent fuel and waste is generated as a result of commercial nuclear power production, and as a byproduct of our Nation's nuclear defense activities, including used fuel from nuclear-powered submarines and aircraft carriers and from the legacy waste created from uranium and plutonium development as nuclear weapons deterrents.

No one knows the magnitude of impact stemming from the development of these nuclear deterrents more than the Tri-Cities community, where the Hanford Site played a major role within the Manhattan Project during World War II to develop the first atomic bomb. It was because of the extraordinary work of the more than 50,000 workers at Hanford that we were able to end World War II, and later the Cold War.

However, this work came with great repercussions. The Hanford Site contains 56 million gallons of high-level radioactive waste, and is one of the world's largest nuclear cleanup efforts. Fifty-six million gallons, Mr. Speaker, enough to fill this room that we are standing in today more than 20 times.

This amount of radioactive waste has been a legacy issue in my district since the 1940s. My constituents fully understand the impacts holding this waste has on the region. The Federal Government must keep its commitment to collect and dispose of it to a permanent repository.

Thankfully, Mr. Speaker, H.R. 3053, the Nuclear Waste Policy Amendments Act of 2018, would make great strides in addressing this very problem. H.R. 3053 would, rightfully, move forward with the licensing of the Yucca Mountain facility in Nevada as the first permanent geological repository for spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste.

First designated by Congress in 1987 as the location for these materials to be disposed of, the site has undergone extensive scientific and technical evaluations. In 2002, the U.S. Department of Energy concluded that Yucca Mountain met all of the requirements to serve as a permanent repository. In

2008, DOE applied to construct the repository, but the Obama administration illegally terminated the effort for what appeared to be political, rather than scientific, reasons. Fortunately, for our Nation, and for the communities like the Tri-Cities, this administration has stated its firm commitment to getting this project back on track and moving forward.

Not only does central Washington continue to store the legacy waste from Hanford, but it is also home to the only nuclear power plant in the Pacific Northwest, the Columbia Generating Station. While H.R. 3053 provides for a path forward for a long-term solution for waste disposal at Yucca Mountain, it also authorizes DOE to contract with a private company to temporarily store spent nuclear fuel for the very first time.

Communities that host nuclear power production sites across the country have, for far too long, been held responsible for the management of spent fuel, even though, under law, it is the legal obligation of the Federal Government to collect and dispose of it. This legislation directs DOE to initiate a program to consolidate and temporarily store commercial spent nuclear fuel during the development, construction, and initial operation of a repository.

H.R. 3053 provides for other innovative and necessary management tools for waste, including encouraging DOE to take ownership of spent nuclear fuels from facilities that have ceased commercial operation, and allowing the Department to enter into contract with private storage facilities.

The legislation also protects taxpayers by reducing legal liabilities. Consumers of nuclear energy across the country have paid over $42 billion into the nuclear waste fund, with nearly $40 billion still waiting to be spent to dispose of nuclear waste. This includes more than $200 million from Washington State ratepayers.

What have they received from the Federal Government for paying of these fees, Mr. Speaker?

Absolutely nothing. Not one ounce of waste has been collected, which is the very purpose of the fund.

This legislation will reform the fund to protect ratepayers by assuring there is a definite answer on the Yucca Mountain repository prior to restarting the fee collection.

Mr. Speaker, I have had the privilege of visiting the Yucca Mountain facility. While it may seem to some like just a dusty 5-mile tunnel bored 1,000 feet deep in a remote Nevada desert, I found it to be an impressive site and full of potential. The Federal Government has spent decades, and billions of American taxpayer dollars, studying the best place for a repository. The conclusion was that Yucca Mountain is now the legal repository for spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste under the law.

I cannot express more ardently the importance of moving this effort forward, both for my district and districts around the Nation. This legislation takes a great leap forward for a long-term solution, while also tackling serious impacts and disparities of the current situation facing these communities.

Mr. Speaker, this is a straightforward rule, allowing for considering of H.R. 3053, the Nuclear Waste Policy Amendments Act of 2018. I encourage my colleagues to support the rule, as well as the underlying legislation, to address this vital issue for our entire Nation.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Florida for joining me in support of this important legislation.

Mr. Speaker, getting back to my State of Washington and the legacy of the Federal Government's work at Hanford, like I said, they left behind 56 million gallons of radioactive and chemical waste that is currently being stored in 177 underground tanks in temporary storage.

I had the fortune of being able to join a bipartisan congressional tour of Yucca, of the Yucca Mountain site, to see firsthand what we were talking about. Under the law, Yucca is the Nation's permanent nuclear repository.

What I saw deep beneath the mountain in a remote desert that is between, I think, 90 and 100 miles north of Las Vegas--it has been referred to as the most studied site on Earth. But imagine this: being inside a 5-mile-long tunnel with 1,000 feet of rock above your head and 1,000 feet of rock below your feet. That is what we are talking about.

The Federal Government has spent $15 billion over decades preparing the site as the Nation's sole permanent nuclear repository. Yucca has been deemed safe by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the NRC. A recent safety evaluation found that the site could safely isolate spent nuclear fuel for 1 million years.

Mr. Speaker, the prospect is that Yucca could stand in two different ways: it could be a monument to billions of dollars in government waste instead of being a monument to a solution that we promised every American in this country.

I hope it is the latter, Mr. Speaker, and I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Let me quote the ranking member of the Energy and Commerce Committee,

the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone), who said that:

Overall, this legislation is a balanced step in the right

direction that will benefit ratepayers, taxpayers, and those

living near nuclear facilities housing nuclear waste.

So I am happy to have his support for this legislation as well.

And just a couple of points from the gentlewoman from Nevada, whom I deeply respect and take her perspective on this with a great deal of gravity.

The transportation issue has been brought up several times. Nuclear waste is transported in this country already, and I have just got to tell you, the vessels, the containers that I have witnessed that this waste is being temporarily stored in and used for transportation, literally, is missile-proof. I mean, it is in containers that are very solidly contained and in such a way that the safety factor is many times over to ensure that, in case of any incident, that there would be no contamination.

As far as the language, it is true that the bill would allow the potential increase of storage capacity at Yucca Mountain. However, there is a strict process of approval that would have to be gone through in order to increase the amount of nuclear waste stored at Yucca Mountain, so it is not a given, passing this legislation. It would be something that would go through a very long, strict process.

I just have to say that we would gladly have entertained any amendments to clarify or perfect language along those lines as far as the storage amounts in Yucca Mountain.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Shimkus), who has been carrying the banner for the Yucca Mountain project for many Congresses.

(Mr. SHIMKUS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 2 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois.

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

Mr. Speaker, let me say, it is a pleasure to manage a rule with my friend from Florida (Mr. Hastings), and my hands are wide open, not tipped whatsoever.

Mr. Speaker, the American people have spent over $15 billion in research and development of the Yucca Mountain project. It would be utterly foolish, in my estimation, to literally flush this time, energy, and capital down the drain, particularly as the Department of Energy has deemed that the site has met all the requirements to move forward with the licensing process.

The rule we have debated here today provides for consideration of very, very important legislation, H.R. 3053, the Nuclear Waste Policy Amendments Act of 2018, which would jump-start this vital effort to move the Yucca Mountain plan forward.

Mr. Speaker, I am very proud to speak in favor of this rule, and I urge all of my colleagues to support House Resolution 879 and the underlying legislation to provide relief and a long-term plan for communities like those in my district and those in Mr. Hastings' State of Florida, and the rest of our districts around the Nation.

The text of the material previously referred to by Mr. Hastings is as follows:

An Amendment to H. Res. 879 Offered by Mr. Hastings

At the end of the resolution, add the following:

Sec. 2. Notwithstanding any other provision of this

resolution, the amendment specified in section 3 shall be in

order as though printed as the last amendment in the report

of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution if

offered by Representative

Rosen of Nevada or a designee. That amendment shall be

debatable for 10 minutes equally divided and controlled by

the proponent and an opponent.

Sec. 3. The amendment referred to in section 2 is as

follows:

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to thank one of the House's own and a great public servant. Todd Ungerecht is a proud son of Pasco, Washington, and has given this Nation over 20 years of tireless public service.

Prior to his most recent service with the House Natural Resources Committee as deputy staff director to Chairman Rob Bishop, Todd served the United States Senate for Washington's former U.S. Senator Slade Gorton, for the George W. Bush administration as an appointee with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and for former chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee Doc Hastings.

A proud Gonzaga University undergraduate and law school graduate, Todd is a man of family, of faith, and of public service. He represents the quintessential staffer, working diligently behind the scenes, never looking for credit, never seeking the limelight. Todd is a humble public servant, who places the highest value on good public policy.

As Todd retires from the House, and his wife, Magda; and their two children, Alexa and Evan, head west, we send them our sincere gratitude and warmest wishes.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the life of Steven Sziebert, who passed away at his home in Yakima, Washington on February 23, 2018.

Steve was an exemplary community member with an admirable life story. His family immigrated to the United States in 1957 during the Hungarian Revolution. He graduated from Santa Clara University and entered the Army,

serving 5 years as an Airborne Ranger stationed at Fort Lewis and in South Korea.

At Fort Lewis, he met his wife, Marcia, relocated to the Yakima Valley, and quickly fell in love with Central Washington and all it had to offer his growing family. It was in Yakima that Steve came to realize his knack for construction. He spent his career managing projects across Washington and improving local infrastructure.

Steve will be fondly remembered for his jokes and stories, his welcoming personality, his kindness, and his service to his community. He will be missed by many, and my prayers are with his family and friends during this difficult time.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman, Mr. Woodall, my good friend from the Rules Committee, for yielding me such time.

Mr. Speaker, I also welcome Mrs. Torres to her first management of a rule on the floor. It is a pleasure to have her as part of the Rules Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the rule, including the underlying legislation, H.R. 3144, of which I am a proud original cosponsor.

H.R. 3144, Mr. Speaker, is a vital piece of legislation for my constituents as well as for the greater Pacific Northwest region.

The legislation keeps in place a groundbreaking, comprehensive plan which governs the operations and salmon protection management plan for the Federal Columbia River Power System.

This plan was the product of painstaking negotiations conducted by the Bush and the Obama administrations, scientists, engineering experts at Federal agencies, affected States, sovereign Northwest Tribes, and local stakeholders. In fact, every Tribe in the region was consulted in the development of the 2014 biological opinion, and all but one supported it.

H.R. 3144 ensures that Tribal consultations provided for under the BiOp continue unaffected.

These experts collaborated to develop this comprehensive plan to both protect Endangered Species Act-listed salmon and to provide certainty for our region's ability to continue providing clean, renewable, and affordable power derived from hydroelectric dams.

Now, unfortunately, a Federal judge in Portland, Oregon, has decided to throw out this comprehensive plan and negate years of serious concerted efforts by a diverse set of Federal, State, and local stakeholders. He has anointed himself the sole expert of this river system and has begun dictating scientific and engineering decisions.

As my friend Jack Heffling says: ``One judge in Portland does not know how to manage this river system better than the experts and professional workforce who keep the lights on for the entire Pacific Northwest.''

Jack is president of the United Power Trades Organization, a labor union representing more than 600 men and women who maintain and operate the equipment at hydroelectric projects throughout the Pacific Northwest.

Mr. Speaker, I stand with Jack today and all of the men and women of the power trades. I believe the experts, scientists and biologists, engineers, and professional workers at Federal agencies and on the ground working at our dams should be deciding how to best manage this system, not a judge sitting behind a bench.

Unfortunately, this judge thinks otherwise and now has mandated an ongoing forced spill order over eight of our dams in the region. This order could have devastating impacts on transportation and barging systems, on our flood control capabilities, and irrigation systems; it could impair our agricultural economy, both by limiting modes of transportation for our commodities and by hobbling our irrigation resources.

While there are no cost estimates of the effects this decision will have on transportation and barging, flood control, or irrigation, Federal agencies have estimated that the forced spill will cost ratepayers, utility ratepayers, $40 million per year in increased electrical rates starting in the very near future.

The judge's order could also harm the very fish he is claiming to protect. The Bonneville Power Administration, or the BPA, notes that the risks of exposing fish to the maximum total dissolved gas levels have not been evaluated, nor has it been recommended by the National Marine Fisheries Service or the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

They warn that the potential for adverse effects from exposure to these gases in the river is a concern recognized by experts in the region and also creates risk of adverse consequences for other aquatic species.

The judge's decision to recklessly dictate a water management plan could, in fact, harm or even kill these ESA-listed salmon.

This order also threatens the reliability of the Federal power and transmission system. BPA has also warned of blackouts, stating:

When the Lower Columbia and Lower Snake generators are

operating at minimum generation levels, however . . . there

is far less generation available for use. . . . Under the

right conditions, local blackouts may occur if there is

inadequate transfer capability in the transmission system to

move the necessary electric power to loads.

I am already hearing from our local cooperatives and public utility districts that this threat is not far off. Our communities could be facing the risk of rolling blackouts in the coming months due to this order.

Mr. Speaker, it is because of this reckless antiscience order that constituents and stakeholders from a great variety of backgrounds and viewpoints have joined with me and my colleagues from the Pacific Northwest over these past several months to stand against this decision and support a rational, science-based resolution.

I have been overwhelmed and invigorated by these supporters, whether it is the barge captains on our rivers, who move commodities like wheat for export; or small-business owners, who depend on our affordable electricity throughout the Pacific Northwest; it is the union workers at our hydropower dams and the irrigators, who provide the incredibly vital resource of water for our region; it is the local cooperative managers and public utility district leaders across Washington State and throughout the Northwest who have rallied to bring this legislation to the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives today, and I could not be more proud to stand with all of them in support of H.R. 3144.

Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, not every aspect of this matter has been as inspiring. I have been disappointed to see radical and ideological groups use hyperbolic language to insinuate that my colleagues and I are actively advocating for the extinction of our native salmon species.

Let me tell you, Mr. Speaker, nothing could be further from the truth, and, frankly, I have been appalled that some of my colleagues in this very body have decided to use these same scare tactics to fearmonger other Members of this House.

They claim we advocate for an illegal or an unlawful plan that does not do enough to help fish, yet they fail to mention that it was President Obama's administration who formally approved of this plan after years of work with scientists, with experts, with affected States, and, like I said, with sovereign Northwest Indian Tribes.

Mr. Speaker, I take offense to these fringe voices and proudly stand with the reasoned, serious contributors who have been a part of these collaborative and unprecedented negotiations.

I challenge these detractors, let this plan actually come to fruition, let us actually have a plan that has the intent of continuing our salmon restoration efforts, rather than constantly bogging down our Federal action agencies and experts running the system in decades of litigation after litigation.

Honor the work of these diverse stakeholders who, in a good faith effort, worked to build a plan to both save our salmon and save our dams.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues, support the rule and support H.R. 3144. Join me to save our salmon and save our dams.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman of the Natural Resources Committee for yielding time to me.

Mr. Speaker, earlier this afternoon, I had the opportunity during debate on the rule to rise and speak about this bill, as well as the great coalition of constituents and stakeholders who have collaborated to support H.R. 3144.

Some of the strongest voices are that of our local public utility districts and rural electric cooperatives across the Pacific Northwest, who have been immensely helpful in their advocacy and engagement of this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a stack of letters and resolutions of support from these groups in Oregon, Idaho, and also my home State of Washington. I would like to express my sincere gratitude for their support as well.

Blachly-Lane Electric Co-op,

Eugene, OR, March 1, 2018.

Re Support H.R. 3144 to Protect the Northwest's Economy,

Environment, and ESA-Listed Salmon.

Dear Members of the Northwest Congressional Delegation:

Blachly-Lane Electric Cooperative joins Northwest

RiverPartners and our fellow northwest electric cooperatives

in thanking you for your bipartisan opposition to misguided

components of the President's FY19 budget proposal related to

the Bonneville Power Administration's transmission assets and

rates. We value that the delegation recognizes BPA's

transmission and power generation assets as a pillar of the

Northwest economy and critical to our region's carbon-free

electric energy production, and your united concern for

constituents in the region.

Your bipartisan commitment to protecting BPA's statutory

mission and the longevity of the Federal Columbia River Power

System allows us to ask you for support of H.R. 3144. The

bill will protect the region's access to renewable, carbon

free, and reliable federal hydropower while mitigating

hydropower impacts and protecting Endangered Species Act

listed salmon.

H.R. 3144 would allow the NEPA process to continue as the

Court has ordered, with a comprehensive and transparent

review of federal hydrosystem operations, while postponing

costly and potentially harmful experimental spill and hydro

operations in the interim.

BPA faces uncertainty as escalating fish and wildlife costs

and related litigation negatively impact its power rates.

Keeping BPA sound and competitive serves to shield the agency

from political attacks coming from outside the region. H.R.

3144 provides vital near-term certainty by temporarily

retaining the federal hydrosystem operations plan supported

by both the Bush and Obama Administrations that was

extensively vetted by independent scientists, only until an

ongoing NEPA review process concludes in 2021.

BPA estimates the Court-ordered spill experiment could cost

its power customers an estimated $40 million this year. NOAA

Fisheries' Science Center modeling shows this additional

spill would provide little or no added benefits to protected

juvenile salmon or returning adults. The costs of this

experiment to our electric cooperative members are far too

great, and the outcome to fish far too negative.

If that isn't enough, the spill operations will add 840,000

metric tons of carbon emissions by removing 815 megawatts of

carbon-free federal hydrosystem generation and replacing it

with fossil fuels. This large loss of hydroelectric

generation simply can't be replaced by increasing efficiency,

intermittent wind or solar resources. The Court-ordered spill

undermines Oregon and Washington's progress toward our

carbon-reduction goals.

Your support of H.R. 3144 will keep scientifically

recognized ESA-listed salmon protection measures in place

while allowing a rational, deliberative NEPA process to

generate credible data for future potential dam operations

and salmon-management strategies. H.R. 3144, contrary to

critics' statements, will simply allow for a much-needed

``time out'' from over 20 years of litigation and allow the

federal agencies to focus their limited resources on

conducting the best NEPA process possible to comply with the

court's order.

Also know that the region is not in agreement on the Court-

ordered 2018 spill operations. The federal Action Agencies

(BPA, Army Corps, and Bureau of Reclamation), RiverPartners,

Idaho, Montana, Confederated Tribes of the Colville, the

Kootenai Tribe of Idaho, and the Salish-Kootenai tribe, have

appealed the ruling to the Ninth Circuit. The Court-ordered

spill would abandon federal agencies' best science and

expertise in favor of dictating from the bench an operational

``experiment'' for the complex and crucial federal

hydrosystem. That is not a proper role for any Court.

We urge members of the delegation to support this

commonsense bill with a continued bipartisin spirit. Your

leadership is imperative to keep BPA's hydropower generation

assets affordable and to improve the agency's competitiveness

as quickly as possible. Without a competitive product to

transmit over the wires, BPA will be challenged to meet its

important statutory obligations of providing power and

protecting fish and wildlife.

Passage of H.R. 3144 is critical to help avoid BPA's

current perilous trajectory and further harm to the

fisheries. Modest, practical action now will help BPA avoid

the economic cliff it faces. To wait and later bail out the

agency could impose enormous costs on regional ratepayers and

taxpayers.

Thank you for your time and thoughtful consideration of one

of the most crucial issues facing the Northwest in years.

Sincerely,

Joe Jarvis,

General Manager.

Mr. Speaker, many advocates for the environmental lobby claim to be pro-science, but it is clear that far too often they only rely on that science when it is convenient.

The spill order mandated by this judge could have harmful effects on the very fish species the BiOp was created to protect, and yet my colleagues in opposition to this bill say that we are the ones trying to hurt the fish.

Federal agencies and scientific experts warn of the risks these spill mandates can place on the fish. We should listen to these experts. We should support science. Now is not the time to be pushing ideology. Now is the time to be pushing pro-science pragmatism to both save our salmon and save our dams.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak in support of Holocaust Remembrance Week to honor the millions of lives lost during this horrific period in history.

Fueled by hatred, Nazis brutally imprisoned and murdered more than 6 million Jewish men, women, and children--as well as hundreds of thousands of other victims--resulting in the largest systematic genocide the world has ever witnessed.

Listening to the heart wrenching stories of Holocaust survivors should solidify our commitment to stop this from ever happening again.

I am troubled by a recent study which found that an alarming 66 percent of Americans between the ages of 18 and 34 years old cannot explain the significance of Auschwitz, the concentration camp where Nazis killed 1.1 million people during World War II.

To me, this is a clear sign that now--more than ever--it is vital to educate our younger generations and continue to condemn and denounce the actions of the Nazi regime.

As the years pass, there are fewer brave survivors left to tell their stories, and, unfortunately, there are still acts of genocide occurring around the world.

The United States should do everything in its power to help prevent these atrocious acts from occurring, which is why I am proud to cosponsor the Elie Wiesel Genocide and Atrocities Prevention Act.

This legislation strengthens the U.S. government's ability to prevent and respond to genocide, war crimes, and other crimes against humanity.

The Nazis used fear and hatred to attempt the elimination of an entire population of people. Without intervention, they may have succeeded.

As Elie Wiesel, a courageous Holocaust survivor and Nobel Laureate, said, ``Because I remember, I despair. Because I remember, I have the duty to reject despair.''

It is our moral responsibility as the world's most powerful nation to never forget and to stand up against violence, racism, and genocide across the globe.

As we honor Holocaust Remembrance Week, let this be a reminder of our responsibility to educate younger generations.

Today, I stand with my colleagues to honor, pray for, and remember the victims of the Holocaust. May we recognize and improve upon mistakes in our past, so we are not condemned to repeat history in the future.

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 831 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Polis), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.

General Leave

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.

Mr. Speaker, on Monday, the Rules Committee met and reported a rule, House Resolution 831, providing for consideration of two important pieces of legislation: H.R. 5444, the Taxpayer First Act; and H.R. 5445, the 21st Century IRS Act.

The rule provides for consideration of these measures under a closed rule. Both of these pieces of legislation were introduced with bipartisan cosponsors, and both were passed out of the Ways and Means Committee with unanimous support on both sides of the aisle.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday was not only tax day, but it was also the last time the American people had to file their taxes under an outdated and antiquated system. Thanks to the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act signed into law by President Trump, Americans have much to look forward to: a simplified tax system, lower rates, a doubled child tax credit to help everyday families, a doubling of the standard deduction, and the freedom to buy the healthcare plan that is right for their families rather than be forced to buy government-mandated health insurance.

As these reforms continue to be implemented, and Americans across the country have begun to see their paychecks grow and small businesses begin to move forward with less regulatory burden, a bipartisan effort in the U.S. House of Representatives to modernize and reform the Internal Revenue Service has arisen. The goal is to redesign the IRS into a modern, 21st century agency focused on the ``taxpayers first'' service--reining in IRS abuses, protecting American taxpayers from fraud, and fairly and efficiently resolving disputes within the agency.

H.R. 5444, the Taxpayer First Act, demonstrates a bipartisan, comprehensive effort to modernize and improve the Internal Revenue Service. This legislation makes numerous changes to reorganize the agency in an attempt to focus its efforts on customer service. It creates an independent appeals process to improve dispute resolutions and requires the IRS to submit to Congress a comprehensive plan to improve its customer service strategy. It requires the

agency to maintain the IRS Free File Program, equipping low- and middle-income Americans with free individual tax preparation and electronic filing services.

This legislation also requires the IRS to improve efficiency, enhance cybersecurity, and better meet the needs of taxpayers. By ensuring the agency sends notice to the actual taxpayer before contacting friends, neighbors, or clients when conducting an audit, we can ensure Americans receive fair notice and treatment.

Mr. Speaker, the mission statement of the IRS is to provide America's taxpayers top quality service by helping them understand and meet their tax responsibilities and enforce the law with integrity and fairness to all. Unfortunately, in far too many cases, the IRS fails to provide the quality customer service they claim to strive for.

The nonpartisan Government Accountability Office reported in 2015 that the IRS had no strategy in place to define what quality and customer service should look like, nor did the agency have any plans to develop one. This is unacceptable, so I am pleased that the Taxpayer First Act requires the IRS to work to fulfill their mission statement.

The 21st Century IRS Act similarly seeks to modernize the IRS by specifically focusing on improving cybersecurity and taxpayer identity protection as well as reforming the information technology systems within the agency. The IRS relies heavily on an aging, antiquated IT infrastructure to administer the tax system. This infrastructure, some of which dates back to the 1960s, is unreliable and is not keeping up.

As we just saw yesterday, Mr. Speaker, the web page for paying tax bills using personal bank accounts crashed, leading to Treasury Secretary Mnuchin having to provide Americans with an extra day to file their returns. We must bring the IRS's infrastructure into the 21st century in order to prevent negative impacts on taxpayers seeking to comply with their tax responsibilities as we witnessed yesterday.

Unfortunately, these potential threats can include much more serious threats as well, including potential cyber attacks and fraud schemes that seek to exploit stolen taxpayer information.

The 21st Century IRS Act requires the Secretary of the Treasury to work collaboratively with the public and private sectors to protect taxpayers from identity theft tax refund fraud. This legislation also requires the Secretary to submit a written report to Congress describing how the IRS can utilize new payment platforms to increase the number of tax refunds paid by electronic funds transfers, thereby streamlining the final leg of the filing process for taxpayers.

It provides for further recommendations regarding methods to prevent identity theft and refund fraud and requires that State, local, or Federal agencies conduct on-site reviews every 3 years of all contractors or other agents receiving Federal returns and return information.

These reforms are common sense and will prevent frustrating, prolonged interactions with the IRS that could be much more easily and seamlessly resolved online.

Mr. Speaker, this is a straightforward and bipartisan rule, allowing for consideration of two bills that will require the Internal Revenue Service to put customer service needs of the American taxpayer first, and to reform, modernize, and improve the agency's infrastructure.

The IRS must prioritize cybersecurity and taxpayer identity theft protections. The underlying bills in this rule will do just that, and I encourage my colleagues to support the rule and the underlying legislation to continue our historic efforts to reform our Nation's tax system.

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

Mr. Speaker, I, too, sit on the Rules Committee, and what we witnessed Monday was an amazing thing, coming together in a bipartisan fashion on some very important bills to bring reform to the Internal Revenue Service.

And I might respond to the gentleman's comments.

It was a very open process through the Ways and Means Committee. It was, as far as I recall, at least a 3-year process, working bipartisanly, very cooperatively, in a comprehensive fashion in order to get the work done that was brought together and culminated with the work that we see here today.

So, as far as an open process, I don't know what could have been more open. It was one that we can be proud of, one that we should see more of in this institution, frankly, and I am very proud that we are able to be here today, following a long history of using the closed rule process when we are considering these kinds of bills as it pertains to revenue.

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

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

The Ways and Means Committee put out a discussion draft on March 26 entitled, ``The Taxpayer First Act.'' The committee provided 2 weeks to collect input from Members, stakeholder groups, and the public. I would say to my good friends across the aisle that there were a number of substantive comments received, and my understanding is the committee considered them prior to introducing this bill that we have today.

So I would say let's honor that work. Let's move forward with this important piece of legislation, and I urge support of the rule.

I yield to the gentleman from California.

Reclaiming my time, the bipartisan effort in this bill is reflected in a very, very good way, and I urge respecting that process, respecting the comprehensive, collaborative work that was done on this bill, and I urge support of the rule.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record the many groups that are supporting H.R. 5444, the Taxpayer First Act, as well as the group supporting H.R. 5445, the 21st Century IRS Act.

For the Taxpayer First Act, the Americans for Tax Reform, the Coalition for Effective and Efficient Tax Administration, the National Foreign Trade Council, and the App Association support the Taxpayer First Act.

As far as the 21st Century Act, H.R. 5445, Citizens Against Government Waste, the Electronic Transactions Association, the MarketPlace Lending Association, the National Taxpayers Union, the Taxpayers Protection Alliance, FreedomWorks, the Institute for Policy Innovation, 60 Plus Association, the Institute for Liberty, the Council for Citizens Against Government Waste, Less Government, and the Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council all join us in supporting not only the underlying rule, but the underlying legislation, as I would urge my colleagues to do.

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

Yes.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am delighted my colleagues on both sides of the aisle have come together to work on the important issues covered in both of these underlying bills. This rule provides for consideration of H.R. 5444, the Taxpayer First Act, as well as H.R. 5445, the 21st Century IRS Act.

The IRS currently lacks a comprehensive customer service strategy, nor does it have any system in place to measure metrics and benchmarks for success within customer service. Additionally, the IRS has not undergone organizational restructuring in the last 20 years.

H.R. 5444 requires the agency to develop a comprehensive strategy for customer service and to submit such plan to Congress no later than 1 year after the enactment of this legislation. It provides for the equitable treatment of every American taxpayer, including ensuring proper notice when the IRS seeks further information from an individual.

Mr. Speaker, the IRS spends $2.4 billion, annually, on information technology, technology that, in some cases, dates back, I understand, to the 1960s. The agency struggles with undertaking and completing large IT modernization efforts to update its legacy systems, which, therefore, can put American taxpayers in a frustrating or even dangerous position.

With the rise of tax refund fraud, a modern IT system must be enacted to ensure taxpayers can successfully comply with their tax requirements. H.R. 5445 modernizes and improves the ease and efficiency of the taxpayer experience when filing taxes, retrieving information, resolving issues, and making payments.

This legislation includes a number of provisions to strengthen the IRS' ability to proactively combat identity theft, tax refund fraud, and ensures IRS accountability for secure online taxpayer processes.

In light of the historic tax reform legislation initiated by this representative body, the people's House, and signed into law by the President, President Trump, just last year, it is vital the Internal Revenue Service undertake its own important reforms.

No one enjoys receiving an envelope stamped ``Internal Revenue Service.'' Far too often, taxpayers find the IRS to be inaccessible, intimidating, and unaccountable. American taxpayers deserve a robust and efficient agency with important oversight protections and modernized systems to keep their private information protected.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to speak in favor of this bipartisan rule, and I urge my colleagues to support House Resolution 831, and both of the underlying bipartisan bills.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.