Floor Statements

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

Mr. Chairman, the bill before us today promises to update the ways that agencies make and enforce their rules and regulations. But in many ways, it is a solution in search of a problem. When issuing a rule, Federal agencies must already adhere to rigorous analytical process of considering alternatives, justifying the cost of a rule, and considering input from stakeholders.

Within this framework, agencies have been granted the necessary latitude to react quickly to urgent crises in consumer safety. It has preserved the safety of our food and our drinking water and has protected our families from defects in the products that we rely upon every day. However, the passage of this bill would put that safety and that protection at risk.

With H.R. 5, we are getting six reform bills rolled into one. This sweeping regulatory bill would cumulatively add 60 new procedural and analytical requirements to the agency rulemaking process, invite frivolous litigation against agencies, empower special interests, and emphasize cost-saving over public protection.

If enacted, H.R. 5 will needlessly create such an enormous burden on the rulemaking process that it threatens to hamstring agencies and discourage them from pursuing new rules at all. In its present form, this bill endangers our Nation's environmental, public health, workplace safety, and consumer financial security protections.

My amendment would offer critical protection by exempting rules pertaining to the prevention of the transmission of foodborne illness or assistance to food facilities to meet preventive-control requirements for safety.

Protecting consumers from dangerous food contamination is a worthy goal in and of itself. And this amendment would go even further by protecting jobs and businesses. For example, in 2015, Blue Bell Creameries suffered a deadly listeria contamination crisis and had to recall 8 million gallons of ice cream. After the company shut down most of its production, Blue Bell was forced to lay off 1,450 employees from their jobs, or 37 percent of their workforce, and an additional 1,400 employees were furloughed.

Chipotle is also still reeling from various outbreaks of E. coli, salmonella, and norovirus over 2015 and 2016, which caused widespread panic among customers and the company's shareholders. Despite marketing efforts to repair its reputation, Chipotle's sales have steadily declined, and it plans to open fewer stores in 2017. This, in turn, had a domino effect on Chipotle's paper bowl supplier who laid off 5 percent of its employees because of decreased demand from Chipotle.

Afterward, both Blue Bell and Chipotle took aggressive remedial steps, such as conducting deep cleansing of equipment and facilities, changing food preparation procedures, hiring food safety consultants, training employees, and temporarily suspending operations. The FDA responded by proposing proactive rules, such as having manufacturers come up with a plan to identify potential food safety problems and how to respond to them. The FDA also proposed a rule to establish standards for growing, harvesting, packing, and handling produce.

Both these rules could greatly assist businesses in minimizing future food contamination and having to deal with the economic aftermath of an outbreak. However, under H.R. 5 in its current form, similar such FDA rules could be delayed by years or halted entirely. We can't afford to put consumer safety and our economy at risk while Congress entangles any real possibility for immediate and preventative action.

I ask my colleagues to support this commonsense amendment to ensure that we protect the public and health and safety of our constituents.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend from Pennsylvania for his comments, but the assertion that this does nothing to frustrate or jeopardize food safety is not true. This creates 60 new procedural and analytical requirements to agency action, and that will invite frivolous litigation, empower special interests, emphasize cost saving over public protection, and make implementation of these rules almost impossible.

It is important to remember, Mr. Chairman, when issuing a rule, Federal agencies already are required to adhere to a rigorous analytical process of considering alternatives, justifying the cost of the rule, and considering input from stakeholders. I gave two examples in my earlier comments that demonstrate that there is a real role for the Federal Government in the implementation of rules to protect food safety. There are real consequences not only to the individuals harmed but to our economy by these sorts of events. This bill will not only frustrate that, in many instances, it will make it impossible. I urge my colleagues to support this commonsense amendment.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I stand in opposition to this rule, which was pushed through the Rules Committee as a closed rule and did not make in order an amendment, which I support, offered by my colleagues, Mr. Price, Mr. Connolly, and Mr. Engel.

Their amendment, like H. Res. 11, objects to the U.N. Security Council Resolution 2334, which I believe was an unfair and one-sided resolution that placed undue blame upon the State of Israel for the impasse on peace negotiations.

Like the Obama administration, I am frustrated by the lack of progress in recent years toward achieving a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian crisis. However, I do not believe that the resolution passed by the Security Council contributes in any way to positively moving this process along.

Let's not mistake the fact that the Palestinian Government, which currently includes the terrorist faction Hamas, has done little to support peace negotiations. By refusing to publicly recognize Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state, condoning terrorist activity and pursuing unilateral actions at international institutions in violation of the Oslo Accords, the Palestinians have continuously placed roadblocks to achieving peace.

Let me be clear, the ongoing settlement activity sanctioned by the Israeli Government is also counterproductive to the peace process. If the Israeli Government wants to remain a beacon of freedom and democracy in the Middle East, they must recommit themselves to achieving a peaceful two-state solution where a Jewish Israel exists peacefully with the Palestinian state.

With the events of recent years, I am extremely fearful that the two- state solution is, if not dead, in critical condition. There are those within both the Israeli and Palestinian Governments who are actively working to ensure its demise. I think, as Members of Congress who strongly support Israel, we should be doing everything we can to convey to both the Israelis and the Palestinians that we will not stand by and watch them torpedo the hope of a peaceful solution to this crisis.

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

Mr. Chairman, my amendment to H.R. 26 would exempt rules concerning public health or safety from the burdensome requirements of this legislation.

Simply put, when a rule is necessary to protect the health and safety of the public, it is critical that the rule be put into effect without unnecessary delay.

If this legislation is enacted without this amendment, it will create an untenable regulatory environment that will make it nearly impossible for agencies to safeguard the public welfare.

This legislation could bring to a grinding halt critical rulemaking such as rules relating to the transportation of hazardous materials by the Department of Transportation, clean air regulations by the EPA, and worker-protection standards by OSHA.

For example, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration implemented an economically significant rule that, by May 2018, all new vehicles must have rearview cameras. This regulation will help drivers have better visibility behind their car, greatly reducing the likelihood of backover crashes which largely involves small children.

But under the REINS Act, this rule would require a joint congressional resolution with an unrealistic timeline for implementation. For every year this rule would be delayed, the Traffic Safety Administration estimates that there would be, on average, 15,000 injuries and 267 fatalities resulting from backover crashes.

Proponents of this legislation may argue that H.R. 26 contains an emergency exemption which allows a major rule to temporarily take effect following an executive order stating that there is an imminent threat to public health and safety. Even when the threat is not imminent, the danger to the public health and welfare may be great and the fundamental responsibility to protect the public remains.

This legislation would substantially hinder the ability of agencies to fulfill this obligation, placing Americans at greater risk for the benefit of powerful corporate interests. In its present form, the Coalition for Sensible Safeguards and the alliance of more than 150 consumer, labor, faith, and other public interest groups predict that, by allowing Congress to even veto uncontroversial rules that protect public health and safety, the REINS Act ``would make the dysfunction and obstructionism that plague our political process even worse.''

In echoing this sentiment, the American Sustainable Business Council, which represents over 200,000 businesses, opposes H.R. 26 because it would recklessly place the burden of proof on the taxpayers in order to protect themselves on environmental, health, and safety issues and would shift responsibility away from powerful corporate interests.

While my amendment will not cure all that ails this legislation--and there is a lot--it will address one of its most glaring flaws and preserve the ability of agencies to protect public health and safety. I urge my colleagues to support my amendment.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, the gentleman just made an assertion that, in fact, nothing in this legislation does anything to frustrate the goals of protecting health and safety; but, of course, it does. It prevents the implementation of rules which, in fact, protect public health and safety.

If my amendment were to pass, that statement would be true--it would do nothing to frustrate it--but without this amendment, it prevents the implementation of a rule that would, in fact, protect public health and safety. It is a reasonable exemption that will ensure that we protect the well-being and the health of our constituents. I urge all of my colleagues to support the amendment.

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

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, just a few hours after they attempted to kill the independent Office of Congressional Ethics and strip it for parts, Republicans backed down in the face of public outrage. It speaks volumes that the first thing Republicans attempted to do was weaken ethical standards and that they only changed course once their efforts were exposed to the public. This is not what the American people sent us here to do.

It seems that, contrary to rhetoric, Republicans don't want to drain the swamp. They want to fill it up. This is wrong, and it is critical that Members of Congress be accountable and adhere to the highest ethical standards.

In the weeks ahead, it is critical that all of us hold the majority accountable and prevent them from going back to the days when thinly veiled bribes, kickbacks, and worse were commonplace in this town.

We need more ethical reforms in Congress, not less. That is why I have introduced the ETHICS Act, to require every Member of Congress to undergo the same annual ethics training that their staffs have to complete. That is why I am asking Members of both parties to demand better from our elected officials than what we saw over the last 48 hours.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to clause 1, rule I, I demand a vote on agreeing to the Speaker's approval of the Journal.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. Speaker, each year, the Department of Veterans Affairs designates a week in February as the National Salute to Veterans to honor the brave men and women who have served our country. More than 98,000 veterans are cared for in the VA facilities across America, and the National Salute to Veterans is one small way to say thank you to these brave men and women.

Every year, I join with students all across Rhode Island to deliver Valentines to veterans during this week in order to pay tribute and express our appreciation for their service. This Saturday, I will visit the Providence VA Medical Center and veterans' homes across the State to personally deliver thousands of handwritten cards. This week, VA medical facilities all over will be holding many special activities to pay tribute to the veterans who have bravely served our country.

I encourage my colleagues and everyone listening to contact your nearest VA medical center and ask for Voluntary Service to get involved and salute America's heroes this week.

Mr. Speaker, every single day, our national security personnel work tirelessly to protect Americans from harm. At a time of renewed threats from ISIS around the world and with the recent attacks in France, these men and women have done the tremendous job of keeping our country safe; but unless Congress acts in 17 days, the Department of Homeland Security will run out of funding.

Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson has warned that 30,000 Homeland Security workers will be furloughed, and the rest will be forced to work without pay. Is this really how our government should treat its employees on the front line of our national security system?

In an effort to roll back President Obama's executive action on immigration, House Republicans have attached toxic policy riders to their Department of Homeland Security bill. The Republican-controlled Senate has rejected this bill three times, but rather than taking up clean legislation to provide our frontline personnel with the resources they need to protect our country, they instead are attaching all of these toxic riders.

House Republicans continue to play political games with our national security. I call on my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to stop putting politics ahead of the safety of American families and fund the Department of Homeland Security immediately.

Mr. Speaker, this week, President Obama unveiled his fiscal year 2016 budget, which outlines his funding priorities for the year ahead.

This proposal builds on the economic progress we have made by properly focusing on middle class initiatives, and it supports initiatives that create jobs, educate young people, increase access to affordable child care, repair our crumbling roads and bridges, and keep communities safe--all to ensure that the American economy works for everyone and that recovery reaches all Americans.

The President's proposal is a strong starting point for Congress to work together to produce a smart and sensible budget that reflects the priorities of working Americans, that keeps our country safe and our economy growing.

I urge my Republican colleagues to drop their misguided proposals that benefit special interests, that repeal the Affordable Care Act, and that restrict women's health care decisions, and to focus instead on a bipartisan

budget agreement that ensures all Americans share in our country's growing recovery and that makes the right investments for our future.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize the state and local leaders and emergency responders in Rhode Island who, as I speak, are working tirelessly to manage the impact of Winter Storm Juno that struck Rhode Island last night.

This storm is still hitting Rhode Island with heavy snow, high winds and coastal flooding. As a former Mayor, I understand the devastating impact this type of snowfall can have on individuals and families, and the painstaking efforts it will take to restore services to Rhode Island's communities.

Yesterday our entire delegation sent a letter to President Obama, Senator Jack Reed, Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, Congressman Jim Langevin, and I, urging the President to make federal assistance available to Rhode Island to support emergency operations and recovery due to the blizzard conditions.

I stand ready to assist my home state in any way I can, and applaud the tremendous efforts of our Governor Gina Raimondo, Mayor Jorge Elorza and all the dedicated local leaders and emergency responders who are working around the clock to ensure Rhode Island makes a speedy recovery.

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

I rise in strong support of H.R. 514, the Human Trafficking Prioritization Act.

First, let me thank the gentleman from California, Chairman Royce, and the gentleman from New York, Ranking Member Engel, for their leadership on this issue. I particularly want to thank my outstanding colleague from New Jersey, Congressman Chris Smith, for introducing this important piece of legislation and for the work he has done for so many years on this issue. This bill will elevate the Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking to the status of a bureau within the State Department.

Put simply, human trafficking is slavery. Victims of human trafficking are deprived of their individual freedoms and suffer unimaginably harsh, coercive, and heartbreaking conditions.

Reports indicate that there is no place in the world where children, women, and men are safe from human trafficking. That means that every government in the world has a responsibility to combat this problem.

The United States has made significant progress toward responding to these crimes within our borders and abroad since Congress passed the Trafficking Victims Protection Act in 2000. Mr. Speaker, today we can take the next step forward by elevating the State Department's Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons to a bureau.

This Office is already doing incredible work. The annual Trafficking in Persons Report has become the global gold standard in assessing how well governments around the world are meeting this challenge and how serious they take their responsibility to eradicate this horrific practice. Their work is forging partnerships and driving innovation on how best to approach this problem, and the Office plays a key role in coordinating our whole-of-government approach to this problem. Elevating the Trafficking Office to a bureau sends a strong message to the world that the United States remains committed to combating modern- day slavery.

Passing this legislation alone will not end this despicable practice, and it is not a problem that we will solve quickly or easily. However, every step we take enhances our ability to prevent these crimes, protect victims, and punish those responsible.

Mr. Speaker, we passed the same bill last Congress. I urge my colleagues to support and pass this important legislation.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, seeing that I have no further requests for time, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 515, known as the International Megan's Law, and yield myself such time as I might consume.

I would first like to commend my colleague, the chairman of the Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health,

Global Human Rights, and International Organizations, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith), for his leadership on human rights and anti-trafficking issues and for his hard work and the hard work of his staff on this bill, as well as Ranking Member Karen Bass of California.

I also want to recognize the contributions of the Judiciary Committee to this legislation. I am pleased that the two committees, Foreign Affairs and Judiciary, were able to come together to work on this important piece of legislation.

Mr. Speaker, around the world, as many as 27 million people are victims of human trafficking. The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime reported that among reported incidents of human trafficking, one in three is a child. Many sex offenders target children in regions with extreme poverty and low levels of law enforcement and prosecution. These repulsive acts violate our deepest moral values, and we have a responsibility to respond appropriately.

The International Megan's Law would help prevent child sex offenders and traffickers from exploiting vulnerable children when they cross an international border. The bill would establish an Angel Watch center within Immigration and Customs Enforcement at the Department of Homeland Security that would provide advance notice to foreign countries when a convicted child sex offender travels to that country. The bill also calls on the President to negotiate agreements with foreign governments that would encourage information sharing on known child sex offenders.

Mr. Speaker, it is important to encourage governments around the world to devote their respective resources toward combating this issue. Protecting trafficked children provides timely victim identification, placing victims in a safe environment, and providing them with widespread support services, such as physical and mental health care, educational opportunities, legal assistance, and reintegration with their families and communities.

Unfortunately, a single law cannot abolish child sex tourism or child sex trafficking, but the International Megan's Law represents a huge step in the right direction by protecting victims and potential victims from terrifying harm.

Mr. Speaker, we passed the same bill last Congress, and I urge my colleagues to do so again.

I reserve the balance of my time.

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

One last comment about the bill before us. The rule of construction was added to the bill, and I would like to make it clear that this rule of construction does not supersede the bill's

general notification requirements, which require the Department of Homeland Security to try to alert a convicted child sex offender whose travel is reported to their country of destination, which is one way of deterring them.

Child sex tourism is an outrageous crime, and we have the responsibility to do everything we can to make it difficult for offenders to prey on their victims. I strongly support this bill and encourage my colleagues to do so as well.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume, and I rise in strong support of H.R. 357, the Human Trafficking Prevention Act.

Mr. Speaker, I would first like to thank my friend and colleague, the distinguished gentleman from New York (Mr. Sean Patrick Maloney), for introducing this important piece of legislation.

Mr. Speaker, human trafficking is modern-day slavery. Its victims are robbed of both their freedom and dignity. Human trafficking violates the founding principles of the United States--life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness--and humanity's very fundamental principle of respect.

According to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, almost every nation in the world is affected by trafficking. There are at least 152 countries of origin and 124 countries of destination affected by human trafficking, totaling over 510 trafficking flows around the world.

Human trafficking victims often pay to be illegally transported into various countries, only to find themselves at the mercy of their captors, deprived of their freedom. They are forced into various forms of servitude to repay their debts. Frighteningly, the U.N. also reports that 1 in 3 known victims

of human trafficking is a child. In some areas of the world, such as Africa and the Middle East, children constitute 62 percent of their human trafficking incidents. Women and girls account for 70 percent of trafficking victims worldwide, and men make up over 60 percent of trafficking incidents for forced labor. Human trafficking victimizes people of all ages, genders, and ethnicities.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to be a cosponsor of the Human Trafficking Prevention Act which is designed to ensure that representatives of our government recognize incidents of human trafficking when they see it.

H.R. 357 would expand Federal training requirements for State Department personnel on identifying and preventing human trafficking. This training includes specific training in persons, briefings for all Ambassadors and deputy chiefs of mission before such individuals depart for their post.

This bill would also require that annual reminders be sent to appropriate diplomatic personnel about the key problems, threats, methods, and warning signs of trafficking in persons at their respective Embassy and consular post.

Mr. Speaker, this legislation will better prepare our Nation's public servants to quickly identify incidents of human trafficking and take swift action as they serve abroad. We passed the same bill last year, and I urge my colleagues to do so again.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Sean Patrick Maloney), the author of this important bill.

Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers, and I yield back the balance of my time.

I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.

Madam Speaker, despite the misleading title of this bill, the fact is that there is no Federal taxpayer funding of abortion right now except in very limited circumstances.

H.R. 7 would for the first time place restrictions on how women with private insurance can spend private dollars in purchasing health care. It would also likely result in the loss of access to comprehensive health care for millions of women who work for small businesses or who will be purchasing insurance in the Health Insurance Marketplaces. Politicians are not medical experts and should not be dictating health care decisions for women.

House Republicans are scrambling this morning to consider the rule for H.R. 7 at the last minute because it became clear that the overly restrictive and unconstitutional 20-week abortion ban would fail a floor vote. Why? Because Americans support comprehensive health care for all women. House Republicans should be bringing up bills to strengthen the economy, to guarantee women equal pay for equal work, to raise the minimum wage, to make child care affordable, and not limit a woman's access to health services in a desperate attempt to relitigate a very divisive issue.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Sister Ann Keefe, who passed away on Sunday, January 18, 2015 after a long and courageous battle against cancer.

In 1982 Sister Ann joined the ministry at St. Michaels Church in Providence and began her life long fight for those who had no voice and those particularly vulnerable and marginalized.

Recognizing the challenges that faced our city and Rhode Island, Sister Ann took action to help the poor, empower workers, advocate non- violence and promote justice for all. Over thirty years of service to our community, she cofounded the Institute for the Study and Practice of Nonviolence, which is credited with helping to sharply cut the city's murder rate. She started Providence CityArts! to help at-risk youth. And, she was involved in creating nearly two dozen other organizations that continue to create opportunity for so many.

I had the extraordinary honor of working with Sister Ann over many years and treasured our friendship. As Mayor, I was especially proud to work with Sister Ann to support the Institute for the Study and Practice of Nonviolence to make Providence safe for kids and future generations of young Rhode Islanders. During this time, I witnessed her leadership skills, dedication and profound commitment to the youth of our city. Last year, even though she was battling cancer, Sister Ann was still fighting for those without a voice and helped my office secure Saint Michaels Church as the location for a comprehensive immigration reform rally and attended the event to show her support. There are so many examples of when she would connect those in need with those that could help.

She was a remarkable and strong woman who served as an inspiration for all of us and she leaves behind a great legacy. Her passing is a tremendous loss for Rhode Island, but her presence will continue to be felt in the community through the many organizations she helped found and run, and the positive impact she has had on so many.

My thoughts and prayers are with her family and loved ones. Rest in peace, Sister Ann.

Section 2:

``Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed.''