Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to add my voice of strong support for the Amateur Radio Parity Act of 2017. This important measure will affirm individual freedom and property rights and ensure every ham radio operator has the opportunity to enjoy their pastime regardless of the community in which they live.

H.R. 555 guarantees that all amateur radio operators living in deed- restricted communities have the right to construct and operate an effective outdoor antenna without burdensome restrictions being imposed by their respective homeowners' association.

Under the bill, HOAs would be required to allow ham radio use with the least practicable restrictions to preserve their aesthetic interests.

Across central Washington, many of my constituents are avid ham radio operators. I believe we should be encouraging this advocation, which also serves as a useful tool for emergency communications and preparedness.

I was proud to cosponsor this legislation in the 114th Congress, and I commend the work of Chairman Kinzinger, Chairman Walden, and Mr. Lance to bring this bill forward again.

I look forward to supporting this bill on the House floor later today, and remain hopeful that, in this new Congress, we can advance the Amateur Radio Parity Act to the President's desk, where it can be signed into law.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my good friend from Georgia for yielding me this time to speak on these important issues.

Mr. Speaker, the opportunity to speak on this important rule that provides consideration for the fiscal year 2017 budget resolution and S. 84, which provides a legal exception for General Mattis to serve as Secretary of Defense, certainly are important issues. As a member of the House Rules Committee, I am very proud to support this rule as well as both of the underlying measures.

S. 84 provides a one-time exemption on behalf of an individual who is uniquely qualified to serve during a very challenging period in our Nation's history and a time when U.S. national security and military readiness is of paramount importance for both Americans and our allies around the world.

This legislation does not permanently change the law nor does it diminish the founding principle of civilian control of our military. In fact, this rule allows for consideration of legislation providing for a one-time exemption that does exactly the opposite. It reinforces the doctrine of civilian control of our military. By setting into motion this unique procedure, the people's elected representatives are taking the seriousness of this circumstance to heart, to debate and carefully weigh granting a historic exception, only provided on one other occasion in our history.

The man at the center of this matter demonstrates the extraordinary nature of the situation we currently face. General James N. Mattis has served our Nation with unparalleled distinction over the past 40-plus years. Born in Pullman, Washington, General Mattis grew up in my congressional district, the Fourth District of the State of Washington. He attended what was then Columbia High School, now Richland High, and graduated from Central Washington University.

It was growing up along the banks of the Columbia River in Richland where General Mattis' parents instilled in him a deep passion for reading, which then developed into a renowned lifelong devotion to intellectualism, military and world history, and the study of war.

General Mattis has been in command at increasing levels throughout his career within the United States Marine Corps, where he began as a student enrolled in ROTC, rose to the rank of general, and served as commander of the United States Central Command responsible for American military operations in the Middle East, Northeast Africa, and Central Asia. Few individuals command the respect and admiration General Mattis has earned amongst the troops, national security experts, and military and civic leaders.

This rule allows for the consideration of legislation to provide the United States Senate its proper role of advice and consent regarding the nomination of General Mattis to serve as our next Secretary of Defense.

I urge my colleagues to support this rule so the Senate can rightfully provide its constitutional guidance, which I am confident will overwhelmingly support this distinguished leader and public servant from the great State of Washington.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce the Veterans Emergency Treatment (VET) Act. One of the most important functions of our federal government is to support and sustain those who have been willing to sacrifice all they have to defend our nation. Whenever our government fails to meet this responsibility, swift action must be taken. Far too many stories of our nation's veterans receiving inadequate care have plagued the Department of Veterans' Affairs (VA). My legislation seeks to improve one aspect of treatment for our men and women who have served in uniform. The VET Act will ensure every veteran is afforded the highest level of emergency care at all emergency- capable medical facilities under the jurisdiction of the Department of Veterans' Affairs (VA).

The VET Act applies the statutory requirements of the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA) to emergency care provided by the VA to enrolled veterans. EMTALA was enacted by Congress as part of the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 and is designed to prevent hospitals from transferring, or ``dumping,'' uninsured or Medicaid patients to public hospitals. The legislation requires a hospital to conduct a medical examination to determine if an emergency medical condition exists. If such a condition does exist, the hospital is required to either stabilize the patient or comply with the statutory requirements of a proper transfer. If an emergency medical condition still exists and has not been stabilized, the hospital may not transfer the patient unless the patient, after being made aware of the risks, makes a transfer request in writing or a physician certifies that the medical benefits of a transfer outweigh the risks.

It has become clear that the VA is not fulfilling the EMTALA directive. All too frequently, the policy is to turn down those who try to access an emergency room. In February of 2015, 64-year-old Army veteran Donald Siefken, from Kennewick, WA, arrived at the Seattle VA hospital emergency room in severe pain and with a broken foot that had swollen to the size of a football. No longer able to walk, he requested emergency room staff assist him in traveling the ten feet from his car to the emergency room. Hospital personnel promptly hung up on him after stating that he would need to call 911 to assist him at his own expense. Several minutes later a Seattle fire captain and three firefighters arrived to assist him into the emergency room.

The VET Act will amend current law to remove the ``non- participating'' designation from VA hospital facilities and statutorily require them to fulfill the requirements of EMTALA. My commonsense and straightforward legislation will ensure that every enrolled veteran who arrives at the emergency department of a VA medical facility indicating an emergency condition exists is assessed and treated in an effort to prevent further injury or death.

I urge all members to join me in supporting this legislation. We must ensure our veterans are treated fairly and with the respect they deserve.

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 40 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), my good friend, 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 40, providing for the consideration of two important pieces of legislation: H.R. 238, the Commodity End- User Relief Act, and H.R. 78, the SEC Regulatory Accountability Act.

The rule provides for the consideration of these measures under a structured rule and makes in order any amendment submitted to the House Rules Committee, including all five Democratic amendments to H.R. 78, as well as all eight amendments submitted for H.R. 238, allowing for a balanced debate on these very substantial issues.

H.R. 238 is essential to the smooth functioning of the American economy and is long overdue for enactment into law. This important legislation reauthorizes until 2021 the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, also known as the CFTC, which had its statutory authority lapse in 2013. The House passed the Commodity End-User Relief Act with bipartisan support in the 114th Congress, and a similar bill was also adopted in the 113th Congress, establishing a strong record of bipartisan support for this measure. Unfortunately, in both instances, the Senate failed to take up the legislation before the end of its respective Congress, which is why it is imperative that we pass this bill through both Chambers and send it to the President's desk.

After the financial crisis of 2008, practically everyone agreed that changes needed to be made to our financial services sector in order to protect families, farmers, small businesses, and our economy, as well as to prevent another crisis in the future. Like many of my colleagues, I have concerns with some of the reforms that were instituted in response to the crisis because they have put overly burdensome restrictions and regulations on our economy and our business communities. But like every major, comprehensive law, there are always unintended consequences that need to be addressed, and H.R. 238 does exactly that.

For example, the authors of Dodd-Frank argued the law's main purpose was to reduce systemic risk to our economy. However, I don't think anyone would argue that farmers who are simply trying to lock in a good price for their corn or their wheat are a systemic risk to the economy. Similarly, restaurant chains looking to make sure they have enough beef, enough pork, or enough potatoes to sell to their customers don't pose a systemic risk, just as utility companies seeking to ensure that they have adequate power supplies to meet the needs and demands of their ratepayers did not cause the financial crisis. Unfortunately, the current law imposes rules that treat all of these entities as major risks to our economy, and it imposes overly burdensome capital and paperwork requirements on them.

Mr. Speaker, critics may claim that this bill undermines consumer protections. However, this could not be further from the truth.

Title I of the legislation puts in place greater consumer protections, like requiring brokerage firms to notify investors before moving funds from one account to another in order to prevent abuses like those that occurred at MF Global prior to its bankruptcy.

Title II makes reforms to the CFTC and strengthens the cost-benefit analysis the Commission must perform when considering the impacts of its rules. Opponents have claimed that requiring cost-benefit analyses will open up the CFTC to lawsuits. However, H.R. 238 merely gives the CFTC a standard for writing good rules the first time, which will be a benefit for all of us.

Title III provides relief to the farmers, the restaurants, the manufacturers, the utilities, and other entities which rely on a steady supply of commodities and inherently want to avoid risk but have been caught up in the unintended consequences of the Dodd-Frank reforms. These users have a genuine need to use markets to hedge against bad weather, natural disasters, inflation, price shocks, and other unforeseen circumstances that could jeopardize their ability to serve their customers.

The rule also provides for the consideration of H.R. 78, the SEC Regulatory Accountability Act. This legislation replaces guidance adopted by the SEC in 2012 that currently governs the use of economic analysis in SEC rulemakings and requires the SEC to identify and assess the significance of problems prior to regulating. It directs the agency to conduct a review of existing regulations within 1 year of enactment--and then every 5 years thereafter--to determine the sufficiency, the effectiveness, and the burdens associated with their implementation. Further, H.R. 78 instructs the SEC's Chief Economist to conduct a cost-benefit analysis on regulations the agency is promulgating as well as to provide an explanation describing the SEC's decision-making process, including the implications of not taking the regulatory action.

Economic analysis is the cornerstone of prudent rulemaking and entails evaluating the qualitative and quantitative costs and benefits of proposed regulations as well as potential alternatives in order to determine the correct action an agency should take. We must ensure Federal regulators are thoroughly assessing both the need for the regulation and adequately evaluating its potential consequences-- intended as well as unintended--to prevent small businesses and job creators from being unnecessarily burdened by onerous Federal regulations.

Mr. Speaker, this is a good, straightforward rule, allowing for the consideration of two bills that will hold Federal agencies and their rulemaking processes accountable to the American people. Voters sent a clear message in November that they want a Federal Government that is smaller, less intrusive, and more discerning in its regulatory actions. House Republicans created our A Better Way agenda by listening to Americans about the ideas for our Nation, and the new, unified Republican government will continue our work to change the status quo and provide real progress for all Americans. The adoption of this rule and the passage of the underlying bills is yet another opportunity to show that we heard this message loud and clear and that we will reinforce our commitment to restoring the people's voice in our Federal Government.

I am proud to support the rule providing for the consideration of these measures, and I urge my colleagues to support the rule and the underlying bills.

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

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

First of all, in fact, if I could read from a letter I received this morning from over two dozen agricultural groups. In one sentence, it says: ``Thank you in advance for your support of this bill that is so important to U.S. farmers, ranchers, hedgers and futures customers.'' It is signed, like I said, by over two dozen organizations.

I include in the Record the letter I received this morning, I think, as did my colleague, Representative Polis, from over two dozen agricultural groups and associations located throughout the country in unanimous support of H.R. 238.

January 11, 2017.

Dear Member of the House of Representatives: The

undersigned organizations represent a very broad cross-

section of U.S. production agriculture and agribusiness. We

urge you to cast an affirmative vote on H.R. 238, the

``Commodity End-User Relief Act,'' when it moves to the floor

for consideration.

This legislation contains a number of important provisions

for agricultural and agribusiness hedgers who use futures and

swaps to manage their business and production risks. Some,

but certainly not all, of the bill's important provisions

include:

Sections 101-103--Codify important customer protections to

help prevent another MF Global situation.

Section 104--Provides a permanent solution to the residual

interest problem that would have put more customer funds at

risk--and potentially driven farmers, ranchers and small

hedgers out of futures markets--by forcing pre-margining of

their hedge accounts.

Section 306--Relief from burdensome and technologically

infeasible recordkeeping requirements in commodity markets.

Section 308--Requires the CFTC to conduct a study and issue

a rule before reducing the de minimis threshold for swap

dealer registration in order to make sure that doing so would

not harm market liquidity and end-user access to markets.

Section 311--Confirms the intent of Dodd-Frank that

anticipatory hedging is considered bona fide hedging

activity.

Thank you in advance for your support of this bill that is

so important to U.S. farmers, ranchers, hedgers and futures

customers.

Sincerely,

American Cotton Shippers Association, American Farm Bureau

Federation, American Feed Industry Association, American

Soybean Association, Grain and Feed Association of Illinois,

Kansas Grain and Feed Association, Michigan Agri-Business

Association, Michigan Bean Shippers, National Association of

Wheat Growers, National Cattlemen's Beef Association,

National Corn Growers Association, National Cotton Council.

National Council of Farmer Cooperatives, National Grain and

Feed Association, National Milk Producers Federation,

National Pork Producers Council, National Sorghum Producers,

Nebraska Grain and Feed Association, North American Millers

Association, Northeast Agribusiness and Feed Alliance, Ohio

AgriBusiness Association, South Dakota Grain and Feed

Association, USA Rice, Wisconsin Agri-Business Association.

Mr. Speaker, also, in response to just one of the points that my colleague brought up, in the first 2 weeks of this 115th Congress, the Speaker, as well as the chairman of the Rules Committee, Representative Sessions, has provided opportunity for all Members to appear before the Rules Committee, has invited all Members to submit amendments. In fact, I can gladly say and happily say that every amendment submitted on these two bills has been accepted, if they were proven to be germane.

In fact, one of the arguments made by my good friend is that the freshmen have not had an opportunity to weigh in on these two pieces of legislation. Actually, the young freshman from Maryland had an amendment brought forward, and it was accepted to bring for consideration on the floor. So I think the arguments fall hollow that Members have not had an opportunity to be heard.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Conaway), the good chairman of the Agriculture Committee.

Mr. Speaker, while I applaud the optimism and enthusiasm of the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Polis) about defeating the previous question, getting back to the debate on the rule, I have no further speakers, and I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, I certainly appreciate the discussion over the past few minutes. I believe that this rule and the underlying bills are strong measures that are important to the future of our country.

This rule provides for ample debate on the floor, the opportunity to consider and vote on both H.R. 238 and H.R. 78, as well as every amendment that was submitted to the House Rules Committee, which reflects the balanced, open, and deliberative process afforded by this rule.

H.R. 238 is a solid, substantial measure that will address several critical issues that the CFTC and end user are facing, while also addressing the CFTC's lapsed reauthorization with reauthorizing the Commission through 2021. While some opponents have called for an open rule, this structured rule makes all eight submitted amendments in order.

Mr. Speaker, no one wants to see complete deregulation of our financial services industries and our commodities and derivatives markets. However, it is critical that the regulations put in place are appropriate for our economy and our users. These rules have to provide safeguards and prevent systemic risk but should not hinder our entire economy with one-size-fits-all regulations.

As we have discussed today, the current rules place enormous compliance and financial burdens on small businesses, on farmers and ranchers, utilities, and manufacturers. They take these small, risk- averse entities and place them under the same regulatory scheme as large financial institutions and hedge funds. H.R. 238 will differentiate and exempt the end users who are not a cause of systemic risk--as these entities inherently want to avoid risk--and, thus, shouldn't be subject to the same rules and requirements as financial and investment firms that are less risk averse in nature.

The Commodity End-User Relief Act would make much-needed reforms at the CFTC to strengthen their rulemaking process and add commonsense consumer protections so these regulations are not a continual burden on our Nation's farmers and small businesses.

Mr. Speaker, the rule also provides for consideration of H.R. 78 under a structured rule and makes all five Democratic amendments in order. This legislation takes important steps to engrain a stronger commitment to economic analysis at the SEC, which will facilitate the promulgation of reasonable rules that do not unduly burden registered companies or negatively impact job creation. The measure will increase transparency and oversight, while facilitating additional analysis and reviews of existing regulations, which should be something that all Members of this body can support.

As elected Representatives, I believe we must ensure our regulatory framework is not politicized and that Federal regulators are thoroughly assessing both the need for the regulation as well as adequately evaluating its potential consequences. This bill takes important steps towards achieving all of these goals.

It is important to remember that the financial crisis was not caused by the farmer who grows the food you eat for dinner, or by the utility you buy electricity from, or by the people who provide the wood in your desk or the metal used in your car. I don't know of any reason why we should continue to treat them as if they were responsible, which is what the current law does and is what H.R. 238 seeks to correct.

Further, better informing the American people of the true impact of major regulations does nothing to diminish the ability of regulators to adequately address illegal or inappropriate activities but, rather, increases transparency and the efficacy of Federal rules, which is why passage of H.R. 78 is so critical both to our constituents and to our economy.

Mr. Speaker, this is a strong rule that provides for open and fair consideration of these vital pieces of legislation as well as every amendment that

was submitted to the House Rules Committee. I am proud to speak in favor of this rule, and I urge all of my colleagues to support House Resolution 40 and both of the underlying bills.

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

``Before he enter on the execution of his office, he shall take the following oath or affirmation:--`I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.' ''

Thank you to the gentleman from Alabama.

Mr. Speaker, since its hasty passage in 2010, ObamaCare has been detrimental to American families, businesses, and taxpayers. Americans were promised that they could keep their health care plans and see their premiums decrease. Instead, they have been irreparably harmed by the elimination of their existing health care plans and pushed into a one-size-fits-all health care system--a system that fails to consider individual needs and that eliminates choice of physicians while families are faced with soaring premiums.

The cost of implementing ObamaCare has crippled businesses, hurting the drivers of our economy. Small and large businesses have been forced to pass these increased costs on to their employees, resulting in a decreased workforce, lower wages, and delayed hiring. ObamaCare has hurt economic growth at a time when we can least afford it, damaging our fragile economic recovery.

Put simply, a government-centered approach to health care is not the answer. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, as the newly elected Congressman from central Washington, I rise to mark the 150th birthday of Yakima County, a county at the heart of my congressional district and the county where I was born and am proud to call my home. The Washington Territorial Legislature created Yakima County in 1865, nearly 25 years before Washington itself became a State.

I am a third-generation Yakima County farmer. My family and I continue to operate a 600-acre farm near the city of Sunnyside. Even before the creation of Yakima County, the agricultural industry recognized the vast environmental benefits of the region. Today, agriculture remains the lifeblood of Yakima County's economy, and I am pleased to represent those interests before the House Committee on Agriculture.

Today marks Yakima County's sesquicentennial. Happy 150th birthday. It is an honor to represent you in Congress.

``. . . to provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress; . . .''

Madam Speaker, as a newly elected Congressman from the State of Washington, I rise to mark the 50th anniversary of the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory in my congressional district. I congratulate all current and former lab workers and their families. Their commitment to excellence is apparent from the contributions the lab has made both to the local community and to our Nation.

This world-class facility is key to the long-term growth of the Tri- Cities because of the leading role the lab plays

in national security, clean renewable American energy, efforts to clean up our Nation's defense nuclear waste, chemistry, and more.

Originally created for the Manhattan Project, the lab has adapted to address our Nation's most pressing needs. I look forward to visiting the lab in the coming weeks to congratulate them in person, and I am committed to providing the support the lab needs to continue serving our Nation for another 50 years.

Congratulations to the PNNL family.