Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise to oppose H.R. 3102.

Ending nutrition assistance for millions of hungry children and adults in the middle of a fragile economic recovery is, frankly, close to the very last thing we should be doing right now. As former Republican Senate leader Bob Dole wrote in the LA Times this week, ``this is no time to play politics with hunger.''

Furthermore, Mr. Speaker, the district I represent has one of the highest concentrations of veterans in all of the United States, and I feel morally compelled to point out that the legislation before us would end nutrition assistance for as many as 170,000 veterans who currently receive it. These are men and women who have served our country with honor and who were prepared to give the last full measure of devotion to America.

So, while I absolutely appreciate Mr. Rogers' pointing out the flaw herein, assurances, however genuine, that we will try to take care of this later do not measure up to the sacrifices these men and women have made. Whatever your stereotypical image in your head you carry around of the average recipient, please understand that that includes the men and women who wore our Nation's uniform, and when you know that, you will vote ``no.''

Mr. Speaker, four of the 79 living Congressional Medal of Honor recipients live in the congressional district that I have the great honor to represent. I will speak on three tonight.

I rise first to honor the incredible courage and outstanding heroism of Staff Sergeant Ty Michael Carter of the United States Army-- America's newest Congressional Medal of Honor recipient.

Staff Sergeant Carter was a cavalry scout with Bravo Troop and was awarded the Medal of Honor for extreme bravery in action on October 3, 2009, in Afghanistan. On the morning of October 3, Sergeant Carter's outpost came under heavy and intense fire from all sides. Staff Sergeant Carter charged to an exposed forward position and provided deadly suppressive fire into the oncoming enemy attack, stalling their advance. When a fellow soldier was critically wounded, Staff Sergeant Carter, though wounded as well, courageously charged again through the enemy onslaught to provide aid to his comrade. Sergeant Carter's heroic actions and tactical skill were central to beating back the enemy offensive and saving numerous lives.

It is for his incomprehensible courage that I am proud to honor and remember the actions of Staff Sergeant Ty Michael Carter, a resident of Yelm, Washington.

Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to add my expression of gratitude both to the gentleman from the State of Illinois and to the gentlelady from the State of Hawaii for the honor of participating in this.

I rise now to acknowledge the gallantry of a couple of more residents of Washington State's 10th Congressional District who are recipients of the Congressional Medal of Honor. I've had the great privilege of meeting both of these gentlemen.

First, I rise to honor the heroic efforts of Sergeant First Class Leroy Arthur Petry of the United States Army.

Sergeant First Class Petry was with the 75th Ranger Regiment and was awarded the Medal of Honor for exceptional bravery in action on May 26, 2008, in Afghanistan.

Though seriously wounded following an enemy attack, Sergeant First Class Petry was able to move himself and a companion to safety and communicate the situation to the rest of the squad. When another Ranger moved forward to assist them, a grenade fell between the men. Sergeant First Class Petry unhesitatingly sprang for it and attempted to throw it away. Although he saved the lives of the two men with him, the grenade exploded and seriously wounded Sergeant First Class Petry. Indeed, he lost a good part of his right arm, and his right hand is a prosthetic.

I've shaken that hand on multiple occasions, and I cannot explain the magic that it is among the warmest handshakes I've ever experienced.

It is for his extraordinary heroism and devotion to duty thought I'm proud to honor and remember the actions of Sergeant First Class Leroy Arthur Petry, a resident of Steilacoom, Washington.

Honoring Master Sergeant Wilburn Kirby Ross

Finally, Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the heroic efforts of Master Sergeant Wilburn Kirby Ross of the United States Army.

Master Sergeant Ross was with the 3rd Infantry Division and was awarded the Medal of Honor for conspicuous gallantry in action on October 30, 1944, near Saint-Jacques, France.

After his company had attacked a German company, Master Sergeant Ross placed his machine gun in front of their line in order to absorb the initial impact of a counterattack. Master Sergeant Ross then fired with deadly effect on the assaulting force and repelled it. He continued to man his machine gun, holding off six more German attacks. Master Sergeant Ross killed 40 and wounded 10 of the enemy, broke the assault single-handedly, and forced the Germans to withdraw. Master Sergeant Ross remained at his post that night and the following day for a total of 36 hours.

In a coda to his story, he was a careerist in the United States Army and was inadvertently shipped to Korea after World War II, which was against Department of Defense policy. Not discovered until he was halfway to Korea, his commanding officer asked him what he was doing there. He said, Well, I can hardly swim back now, sir. On the very first day in Korea, Sergeant Ross was wounded again, for which he received the Purple Heart.

It is for his extraordinary bravery that I'm proud to honor and remember the actions of Master Sergeant Wilburn Ross, a resident of Dupont, Washington.

Mr. Chairman, I want to thank Congressman Kilmer for offering this amendment today and, frankly, for his tireless advocacy on behalf of our men and women in our civil service who support our servicemembers and veterans every day. Without this amendment, hardworking men and women who live in the district I represent and who work at Joint Base Lewis-McChord risk losing their security clearance through furloughs that are no fault of their own, thus complicating their employment situation. We should not let that happen.

The issue this amendment aims to resolve is yet another in a long series of issues that show why budgeting by sequestration is bad policy. I don't think anyone in this Chamber actually thinks civilian employees should lose their security clearance because they were furloughed, but the way sequestration was designed makes that a very real possibility.

This is a good amendment to fix a bad policy. I strongly urge my colleagues to support it.

I thank the gentleman from Indiana.

Madam Chair, every summer, Joint Base Lewis-McChord in Washington's 10th Congressional District hosts nearly 6,000 ROTC cadets from all across the Nation. These cadets conduct an assessment exercise we call Warrior Forge. The exercise is an invaluable tool in shaping our next generation of Army officers.

For 40 years, this course has honed the skills, provided the cohesion, and fostered the knowledge necessary to create the Army's next leaders. I have visited this program, and you need not have a single doubt about the quality of the next generation of military leaders in our Nation.

Yet, Madam Chair, an effort is afloat to radically change this proven system, without the knowledge or input from this Congress. Members of this body, including myself, the ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee, and the former ranking member of the House Appropriations Committee have been requesting from the Army a simple brief and cost-benefit analysis of this proposed radical transformation. And for over 2 years, those requests have repeatedly been delayed and dismissed and denied.

Now, while my preference would have been to offer a limiting amendment to this legislation, I asked the ranking member and the chair if, in this instance, we could work together to seek from the Army a timely report so that Congress and the relevant committees can do our job, which is to ensure proper oversight.

I thank the ranking member very much.

Mr. Chairman, H.R. 5 continues the sequestration cuts to Impact Aid. If you represent a military installation, you know what that is, because that's where Impact Aid goes.

I have the honor to represent Joint Base Lewis-McChord, the third largest military installation in all of America. This measure is not good for the children of the men and women who serve us there or any other military base around America. We owe them more.

But my bigger reason for opposing this springs from my perspective as a businessman. If I learned anything in the private sector, including serving on the board of a learning and training company, it is this: to compete in a 21st century economy, you simply have to build a 21st century education system. H.R. 5 does not do that. H.R. 5 does the opposite of that.

If you want, as I do, to grow this economy faster and create jobs, good-paying jobs, you are going to vote ``no'' on this measure.

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

I would like to begin by reciprocating and thanking the gentleman from Texas for his leadership on this issue, and perhaps as notably the gentleman from Pennsylvania for his leadership and cooperation and collaboration in helping to solve this important problem. I thank you, sir. And, more importantly, I thank you on behalf of the many people who will benefit as a result of our action here today.

Madam Speaker, currently the Federal Housing Administration underwrites 100 percent of all reverse mortgages. Let me say that again. The Federal Housing Administration underwrites 100 percent of all reverse mortgages, and that is a program that is deeply troubled, as enumerated by the capable chair of the Financial Services Committee.

And so if you believe, as I do, that reverse mortgages are a financial product that actually ought to be available to some people, but under appropriate circumstances and conditions, it's all the more important that we enact H.R. 2167 today, and not just because TV pitchmen--let's see if I can name them all--James Garner, Henry ``the Fonz'' Winkler, Fred Dalton Thompson, Pat Boone, and Robert Wagner-- entreat our elderly to do so, but because this legislation is very important.

So the question is, as with all legislation: What's the problem? There's probably no better statement of the problem than is represented in this chart which says that 7 percent of the FHA's portfolio is related to reverse mortgages, but 17 percent of their portfolio that is underwater is attributable to reverse mortgages. That is a stark, salient representation of why this legislation is needed.

I might add, frankly, that if you were to compare reverse mortgages across all, just the going forward, 30-year fixed mortgage market, it would be even more stark. This is against all products.

So what's the solution? As the chair indicated, it is to give the FHA the authority through mortgagee letter to adopt certain reforms. The alternative is to wait and to endure the arduous rulemaking process.

I had an agency in the office the other day for which I had a problem, and I sought a solution through the rulemaking process. I asked them, what's the minimum amount of time that would be required for adoption of rules, and they indicated the best of circumstances would be 18 months--sighed, paused--then said more like 24 to 36 months. We can't wait that long, Madam Speaker.

So what are those reforms that are likely to be adopted via mortgagee letter at the FHA? I think most notably, it would require a financial assessment of potential borrowers to ensure that this financial product is suitable for them. There are others as well. It may reduce the amount of funds granted up front to the borrower, and it may require escrow for provision of payment of taxes and insurance, something that is not uncommon in the mortgage industry.

But the financial assessment portion that very well may ensue as a result of passage of this legislation, it's important to note that that is a tool and technique used by the VA when it underwrites reverse mortgages. Let me say that again. The VA uses this tool to underwrite reverse mortgages. And how much of a problem does the VA have with reverse mortgages? Zero. Zero.

So we know with a virtual certainty that this solution which the gentleman from Pennsylvania and I bring to you today will solve the problem.

Finally, let me just say this is a twofer. We don't often get the opportunity for a twofer. This will extend some consumer protection insofar as there are consumers who will not purchase or who will purchase under different terms and conditions this product in a way that will not render them at risk as they are today. And secondly, it will inarguably improve the portfolio of the FHA. So, ladies and gentlemen, I entreat you to vote ``yes,'' and I thank once again both the chair of the committee and the gentleman from Pennsylvania.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today regarding my absence from the House yesterday, Monday, May 20, 2013. Because of this absence, I missed three votes on the House floor and would like to submit how I would have voted had I been in attendance. The votes were:

Rollcall No. 161, on the Motion to Suspend the Rules and pass H.R. 258, the Stolen Valor Act. I would have voted ``yea.''

Rollcall No. 162, on the Motion to Suspend the Rules and pass H.R. 1073, the Nuclear Terrorism Conventions Implementation and Safety of Maritime Navigation Act of 2013. I would have voted ``yea.''

Rollcall No. 163, on Approval of the Journal. I would have voted ``yea.''

I thank the ranking member.

Mr. Chair, I have a different take on this. I rise to oppose this bill not because it seeks to and would effectively undermine the ability of the SEC to function, although it certainly does that. Instead, I want to speak to those who are laboring under the impression that this is good legislation and are conservatives, because it is not good legislation, and it is not rooted in conservative principles.

Indeed, if red States tend to send more conservatives to this Chamber, then they would respect their conservatism by lighting up red, every one of them, when we get to final passage. Conservatives don't pass unnecessary legislation. And yesterday, when we had the privilege of having Mary Jo White, the new chair of the SEC before our committee, she was directly asked: Is this legislation necessary? She was unanimously confirmed, applauded by both sides of the aisle, all philosophies. She said:

Not only is it unnecessary, it's undesirable.

Conservatives don't enact unfunded mandates on State governments or local governments or on Federal agencies. This is a massive unfunded mandate.

And finally, true conservatives and a lot of the rest of us seek commonsense regulatory relief, especially for community banks and credit unions, not additional unnecessary, unfunded regulatory activity.

You know, Mr. Chair, we have several regulatory relief bills before our committee, not yet scheduled, not yet

heard. Congresswoman Capito has H.R. 1553 to grant some regulatory relief to community banks and credit unions. Let's vote H.R. 1062 down and get on to the work of those bills and grant real regulatory relief if we seek to support the SEC in its mission to protect investors and promote fair, orderly, and efficient markets.

Mr. Chair, if you are a true conservative, you're going to vote ``no'' on H.R. 1062.

Mr. Speaker, on Friday, March 15, last month, William Booth Gardner passed away in his home in Tacoma, Washington, after courageously battling the ravages of Parkinson's disease for about 20 years. Born in 1936, he was 76 years old.

Booth Gardner will be remembered for many things. He will be remembered as Washington State's 19th Governor, having served from 1985 to 1993. He voluntarily retired after two terms, with sky-high job approval ratings, and was subsequently appointed as ambassador to GATT, now known as the World Trade Organization, by his good friend, President Bill Clinton.

He will be remembered as a person of means--some would say considerable means--who began his lifelong pattern of ``pay it forward'' by volunteering to work with children in the inner city while he was still in college. He even coached Jimi Hendrix in football.

He will be remembered for turning around a scandal-ridden Pierce County government as its first elected county executive and bringing it into the 20th century.

He will be remembered for his impish sense of humor. At the end of the long campaign for the aforementioned county executive position, so familiar was he with his opponent's speech that he delivered it, verbatim, at the last campaign appearance. It was the only time his opponent was left both figuratively and literally speechless.

Booth Gardner will be remembered for leading Washington State through a stunning era of progress. He was a national leader in civil rights. He appointed our State's first African American to the United States Supreme Court. He signed an executive order banning discrimination against gays and lesbians in the State workforce way back in 1995, way before it was the popular thing to do. And at the time he said, The only thing I care about is if they are competent to do the job.

He pushed forward a trainload of environmental protections. For example, he signed an order protecting wetlands, knowing their importance to ensuring clean water, while most of the rest of us were still thinking about wetlands as kind of like large mud puddles.

He was a national education leader. He chaired the Education Commission of the States and fought for standards before that was popular. He expanded choice for students and restored a then- deteriorating higher education funding system.

He leveraged his very considerable private sector experience to be a great manager of State government, implementing--again, before it was popular--commonsense ideas like a rainy-day fund and life-cycle capital budgeting.

But Governor Gardner really shined in health care. When he chaired the National Governors Association, he triggered the national debate on health care and for improving access for low-income families and containing costs for all of us.

Booth Gardner will also be remembered for the Academy Award-nominated documentary that bore his name, Booth Gardner's Last Campaign. It eloquently told the story of his successful advocacy in our State of the Death with Dignity initiative, which was overwhelmingly approved by the voters.

I'm often asked about how and when I first met Booth. It was 40 years ago this year. I was a 20-year-old very lowly clerk in the Washington State House of Representatives. I took paperwork over to the chair of the Senate Education Committee. And to my great surprise, then-State Senator Booth Gardner invited me into his office, never having met me, and simply said, Sit down and tell me about yourself, Denny. Little did I know that day that, many years later, I would have the unbelievable honor to serve as his chief of staff.

Booth Gardner will be remembered for many things; but mostly I think he will be remembered for governing when government actually worked, and it was due in no small part to his steadfast commitment to civility, respectfulness, and collaboration.

For my own part, I will remember him as boss, mentor, and the truest and dearest of friends.

I now yield to my very good friend, the gentleman from the Seventh Congressional District of Washington State, Dr. McDermott.

Mr. Speaker, it's a beautiful day back in my hometown of Olympia, Washington--of course it's raining cats and dogs, but that's what passes for beauty in our corner of the world.

It's a beautiful day at the Nisqually National Wildlife Refuge near Olympia, and it's a beautiful day at Mount Rainier National Park, which you can see from my neighborhood. But Mr. Speaker, if we don't replace sequestration, I'm worried about how many more beautiful days there are ahead.

If we don't replace sequestration, then some of the 7.5 million visitors who are scheduled to visit one of our 13 national parks aren't going to be able to. They have already announced that they are closing the Ohanapecosh Visitors Center at Mount Rainier. All of this because Congress can't--or won't--do its job.

Mr. Speaker, it is a beautiful day in Washington State, but I don't know for how long.

My wife, Paula, and I live about 500 yards from Olympia High School and its baseball field, and every spring we wander over and watch the team play. For the past 20 years, it's been coached by Todd McDougall, and he's a great coach.

Todd's just 42 years old. He's taught his entire career at Olympia High School. He is one of those--and we all know them--great teachers, as is his wife, Julie, a middle school science teacher.

So you can imagine the community heartbreak a few weeks ago when he was diagnosed with glioblastoma grade 4 brain cancer. Coach McDougall could use our prayers right now, as could Julie, their 11-year-old daughter, Marlee, and their twin 9-year-old sons, Andrew and Dylan.

I hope you'll find out more about this remarkable man at Friends for Todd McDougall on Facebook.