Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, it is so poignant that Paul Ryan announces his retirement the same week that the Republicans bring to the floor the so-called balanced budget amendment, which signals surrender. Republicans can't budget responsibly.

After the largest transfer of wealth in American history with their tax bill that was so flawed they could not even risk having a hearing on it, it was literally being written while we were in work session in the committee. They changed provisions by the hour in a mad scramble for votes and special-interest support.

Ryan leaves as his legacy--a guy who on the Budget Committee railed about deficits, deficit spending, who tried slashing social spending-- he leaves as his legacy trillion dollar deficits for as far as the eye can see, and providing with this balanced budget amendment an excuse to slash spending on programs that matter most to Americans: Medicare, Social Security, Medicaid, even ultimately, it would threaten defense itself.

The balanced budget amendment that the Republicans are going to bring to the floor is a classic example of bait and switch. Republicans have the White House, the Senate, and the House of Representatives. If they wanted to actually produce a balanced budget, there is nothing stopping them from doing it now. But instead, they came forward with the omnibus bill that explodes spending and adds to the deficit even further.

So what do they do now? They are offering this proposal as a fig leaf. The balanced budget amendment that they would freeze into the Constitution would force somebody 4 years, 5 years, 8 years in the future to do what Republicans either will not, cannot, or are afraid to do today.

My senior Senator for years was Mark Hatfield, a principled Republican, and even though I am a Democrat, I was proud to help him in his last campaign when he was under some severe pressure.

Mark Hatfield was principled. He chaired the Appropriations Committee in the Senate. When the Republicans brought forth the balanced budget amendment in 1995, it failed by one vote in the Senate. That one vote, and the only Republican vote against it, was Mark Hatfield because he refused to handcuff the United States into the future and be part of a charade, because he knew as chair of the Appropriations Committee, they controlled the budget strings and they could reduce spending if they wanted. He knew the irony that some of the very people who were touting the balanced budget amendment would turn to him asking for increased spending for their pet projects.

Today, Republicans pretend themselves to be outraged over the Obama- era deficits which were incurred when we were trying to protect the economy from global collapse. All of the independent experts agree that that money was important. It was spent on infrastructure. It was spent on medical research. It was spent on providing a safety net for struggling families.

What is the excuse today for a trillion dollar deficit? I mean, after all of that hard work, the economy has stabilized. It is not growing dramatically, but it is growing. The unemployment rate is low. What is the excuse for a trillion dollar deficit and massive tax giveaways? They are feeling the heat.

Now, they are going to try and deflect responsibility for their trillion dollar deficits in a time of relative prosperity and low unemployment as a result of the hard work that the Republicans opposed.

Republicans and Paul Ryan have made a shambles out of the Tax Code; a mockery out of tax fairness. They are not cutting spending or raising revenues. They just want to put that off for somebody in the future and pretend all of a sudden they are fiscally responsible.

Mr. Speaker, I don't think it is going to work.

Mr. Speaker, this is a very poignant moment. Speaker Paul Ryan announces his retirement the same week that the Republicans bring to the floor the so-called balanced budget amendment, which signals a surrender, that Republicans admit they can't budget responsibly.

After the largest transfer of wealth in our Nation's history with a tax bill that was so flawed they couldn't even risk having a hearing on it, they literally were writing the bill while we were in work session in a desperate scramble for votes and special-interest support.

Ryan leaves as his legacy--a guy who, on the Budget Committee, railed against deficits and deficit spending, slashing social spending--he leaves as his legacy trillion dollar deficits for as far as the eye can see, year after year.

They come forward with a balanced budget amendment. Wait a minute. If my friends wanted to balance the budget, they could do it. They control the White House, they control the Senate, they control the House. If they wanted to, there is nothing stopping them. But, instead, they came forward with an omnibus bill that explodes spending further and adds to the deficit.

The balanced budget amendment would freeze into the Constitution a requirement that somebody else, 8 years from now, balance the budget. It is a classic bait-and-switch situation.

What a legacy for Paul Ryan and the Republicans. They have made a shambles out of the Tax Code, they have made a mockery of tax fairness. They are not willing to make hard spending decisions today. They want to freeze something in the Constitution that would require somebody 7, 8, 10 years from now to do what they are afraid, unwilling, or unable to do today. It is a sham, bait-and-switch in the classic sense.

I don't think the American public is going to stand for it and, certainly, no responsible Member of this House should vote for it.

Mr. Speaker, had I been present for the vote on H.R. 2219, the End Banking for Human Traffickers Act of 2018 (Roll no. 130), which would increase the role of the financial industry in combating human trafficking, I would have voted ``aye.''

Additionally, had I been present for the vote on H.R. 4203, the Combat Online Predators Act (Roll no. 131), which would amend title 18 of United States Code with regard to stalking, I would have voted ``aye.''

Finally, had I been present for the vote on approving the Journal (Roll no. 132), I would have voted ``aye.''

Mr. Speaker, last week, I voted against H.R. 1625, the fiscal year (FY) 2018 Consolidated Appropriations Act. Most troubling, the bill shortchanges our nation's young people by failing to adequately address the gun violence epidemic. The bill also dismisses the urgent need to provide greater clarity for Dreamers and takes a cruel and heartless approach to immigration that does not reflect our country's values. It does all of this while also failing to make tough decisions about our defense priorities. It maintains a $78 billion increase in defense spending above last year's levels without dealing with wasteful and unnecessary nuclear expenditures that will make our country less secure.

That said, I credit our negotiators for funding key Democratic priorities and eliminating many Republican ``poison pill'' policy provisions. The omnibus included several key provisions that I support. The legislation includes additional funding to address our nation's crumbling infrastructure, including transit grant programs that I have long championed, and maintains critical funding for our public broadcasters. The bill also fully funds the Trade Enforcement Trust Fund, includes a $4.6 billion increase for our nation's affordable housing programs, and maintains full support for program to ensure the U.S. continues increasing access to water, sanitation, and hygiene for the world's poorest people.

This is a tough job, and I commend the negotiators for their hard work.

Mr. Speaker, had I been present for the vote on H. Res. 796, the resolution providing for consideration of the fiscal year 2019 Consolidated Appropriations Act (Rollcall No. 124), I would have voted ``no''.

Additionally, had I been present for the vote on H.R. 4467, the Strengthening Aviation Security Act of 2017 (Rollcall No. 128), I would have voted ``aye''.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciated the presentation from my friend from Pennsylvania. I could not agree more that it is time for us to come forward with action.

It was my honor this morning to address the Council of the Great City Schools, who are gathered in our Nation's Capitol--board members, superintendents, dealing with the challenges of education. And they are standing in solidarity with the young people who have raised their voices calling upon Congress to finally act.

One of the things that is deeply troubling is that the Republican leadership refuses to allow a robust debate and action on the floor of the House. There are dozens of provisions that we can come together, produce majorities, enact legislation that will protect children's lives.

Mr. Speaker, the Council of the Great City Schools had a resolution calling upon us to take action that I include in the Record.

Resolution

Council of the Great City Schools, Relating to School Shootings in the

United States

WHEREAS, the Bylaws of the Council of the Great City

Schools assign the Board of Directors all powers and duties

necessary to define the policies and positions of the

organization and state that the Board may conduct acts in

furtherance of those polices, except where the organization

is prohibited from doing so by law or other governing

documents;

WHEREAS, there is a need for the nation's major city school

systems to express their positions on school safety matters

that affect its students and the children residing in its

cities;

WHEREAS, thousands of our students have publicly expressed

concern for their safety

and well-being and have indicated that policymakers should

act immediately to protect them in school and beyond;

WHEREAS, the leaders of the nation's major city public

school systems respect the concerns of their students, and

support the growing civic and social participation of high

school students that was inspired by recent events;

WHEREAS, since the school shooting in Columbine in 1999,

there have been numerous other school shootings, including

those in Red Lake (MN), Lancaster (PA), Blacksburg (VA),

Chardon (OH), Cleveland (OH), Sandy Hook (CT), Broward County

(FL), and many others that have taken scores of young lives;

WHEREAS, too many of our young people are shot and killed

on the streets of our major cities almost every day;

WHEREAS, Americans are 25 times more likely to be killed

with a gun than people in other developed countries;

WHEREAS, Americans make up about 4.4 percent of the world's

population but own some 42 percent of the world's guns;

WHEREAS, assault weapons have no place in society and other

types of guns are too easily obtained;

WHEREAS, teachers are not trained law enforcement officers,

and should not be asked or incentivized to keep weapons

accessible in their classrooms;

WHEREAS, there is no reason based on any viable research to

suggest that adding guns into a school setting or arming

teachers would prevent these acts of violence;

WHEREAS, schools across the country need considerable

additional resources to plan for the possibility of such acts

of violence, coordinate with law enforcement, and secure

their buildings from intruders;

WHEREAS, many schools lack the mental health counselors,

psychologists, and social workers they need to identify and

work with students showing warning signs for depression and

violence;

WHEREAS, the nation's data collection on gun violence and

gun ownership is inadequate to monitor, understand, or

prevent these events from happening; and

WHEREAS, the multiple school shootings that the nation has

witnessed over the years have complex causes requiring

multiple solutions.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of the

Great City Schools, its member districts, and staff stand

with the students of Broward County Public Schools and the

nation in demanding effective and comprehensive action from

the federal government to protect schoolchildren;

NOW, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council of the Great

City Schools calls on the Congress of the United States to

ban the sale, purchase, possession, and use of assault

weapons and large-capacity ammunition cartridges, except

those needed by the military and law enforcement;

NOW, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council of the Great

City Schools calls on the Congress of the United States to

require and strengthen universal background checks to possess

any type of firearm;

NOW, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council of the Great

City Schools calls on the President of the United States to

charge all agencies of the federal government with the task

of reducing the number of gun-related injuries and deaths in

America.

NOW, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council of the Great

City Schools is opposed to the arming of teachers to protect

schools and children;

NOW, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council of the Great

City Schools calls on the Congress of the United States to

extend the perimeter of Gun-Free School Zones;

NOW, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council of the Great

City Schools calls on the Congress of the United States to

appropriate adequate new funds to allow school districts

across the nation to plan and coordinate school security

efforts with law enforcement officials and make other

building alterations that may be necessary to protect

students, teachers, and staff;

NOW, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council of the Great

City Schools calls on the Congress of the United States to

appropriate adequate new funds to increase the numbers of

counselors, mental health staff, psychologists, and social

workers in our schools;

NOW, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council of the Great

City Schools calls on the Congress of the United States to

appropriate adequate new funds for programs to educate

students and their families on the dangers of firearms; and

NOW, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council of the Great

City Schools calls on the Congress of the United States to

require that states and the federal government collect

whatever data necessary to track, monitor, understand, and

prevent the extent of gun violence in America.

Mr. Speaker, we find that areas that have acted, in the aftermath of gun violence, to increase protections for gun safety actually makes a difference. It is a lie that gun safety provisions make no difference; that, somehow, people who are intent on slaughter will not behave according to the law, they won't obey it; it will have no impact.

The evidence is that where actions are taken to reduce gun violence, to increase protections, to take guns away from people who shouldn't have them, gun violence is reduced.

In the aftermath of Sandy Hook, when this Congress was paralyzed, refused to allow a bipartisan legislation that would have increased universal background checks, for instance, the State of Connecticut acted. And over the years, they have enacted a series of provisions on gun safety that have resulted in reduced gun violence.

Indeed, the States with the fewest gun safety protections, some no protections at all, have the highest rates of gun violence.

We don't have to fall victim to that type of thinking.

The Council of the Great City Schools pointed out in their resolution that Americans are 25 times more likely to be killed with a gun than people in other developed countries. They reject the proposition that we have to be the only developed country that cannot protect our families from gun violence.

They recognize that there is no place to arm teachers in response. There is no evidence that having teachers packing heat would make any difference at all. What it would do is add another layer of uncertainty, and more guns in schools increases the likelihood that they will be used.

They categorically reject the arming of teachers, but say move forward, remove the ability of people to purchase high-capacity automatic weapons, tighten background checks, and make it easier to do research on gun violence--which this Congress has tried to make illegal.

Mr. Speaker, I am hopeful that we will not have the Republican leadership continue to deny us an opportunity to fully debate the proposals that are circulating on a bipartisan basis that would make a difference dealing with background checks, dealing with taking guns away from people who shouldn't have them; making sure that we are reducing the access to some of the most destructive military weapons that have no place circulating in society, that children not old enough, young men not old enough to buy a beer can buy an AK-47. That is wrong.

Mr. Speaker, I hope that people's hearts and minds will be touched by the eloquence that we have heard from these young people in Florida who have endured it, who have put pressure on the Florida Legislature to act. I hope we can do the same.

Mr. Speaker, today Rep. Lee Zeldin and I are introducing a resolution that celebrates America's wineries and vineyards and recognizes the importance of distinctive American winegrowing regions, including those protected by American Viticultural Area (AVA) designations.

I am particularly proud of Oregon's AVAs and the world-renown pinots they produce. Nationally, there are more than 10,000 wineries operating in all 50 states. These economic powerhouses generated, directly and indirectly, more than $219 billion for the United States economy last year and directly employ nearly 1 million Americans. Together, they make 10 percent of global wine production.

American Viticultural Areas (AVAs) are designated wine-growing regions in the United States that have distinguishing features affecting viticulture, including climate, geology, soils, physical features, and elevation. This year marks the 40th anniversary of the creation of the American Viticulture Area designation system. AVA designations allow vintners to describe more accurately the origin of their wines and help them build and enhance the reputation and value of the wines they produce. They also help consumers identify wines they wish to purchase.

For these reasons, we ask our colleagues to join us in recognizing the significant contributions to the economic and cultural life of the nation made by American wines and distinctive American wine-growing regions and acknowledging the value of American Viticultural Area designation in promoting American wines domestically and abroad. Together we should continue to support efforts to promote awareness of and appreciation for distinctive American winegrowing.

Mr. Speaker, had I been present for the vote on H.R. 3183--To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 13683 James Madison Highway in Palmyra, Virginia, as the ``U.S. Navy Seaman Dakota Kyle Rigsby Post Office'', (Roll Call No. 92), I would have voted ``aye.''

Additionally, had I been present for the vote on H.R. 4406--To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 99 Macombs Place in New York, New York, as the ``Tuskegee Airman Post Office Building'', (Roll Call No. 93), I would have voted ``aye.''

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman's courtesy in permitting me to speak on this.

This bill, I think, is an example of the politics and legislation that Ray Baum would be particularly proud of, characterizing his work as a policymaker and a policy adviser.

I had a chance to work with Ray in his other hats: chairing the Public Utilities Commission, as a distinguished legislator and majority leader, and, of course, his role here in Congress.

I appreciate the product we have before us today. I have enjoyed listening to people reaffirm areas that they are proud of, making a difference for people.

I appreciate, in particular, the authorization of new spending to help broadcasters' expenses relating to spectrum reallocation. This is very important, especially for public broadcasting stations.

But I want to raise one item of concern, and I hope the chairman and ranking member would work with us to look at the bill's study of spectrum for commercial uses dealing with the mid-band, or C-band, to consider public broadcasting.

I fear that if we are thrust into competitive bidding with public broadcasting, they are likely to not be able to compete effectively. But it will affect millions of people across the country.

I applaud the committee's bipartisanship and work with the Senate, but I hope that future consideration of the impact of C-band reallocation on public broadcasting would be something that the committee could look at to make sure that we are protecting those vital interests.

Mr. Chair, when the Americans with Disabilities Act was first signed into law, President George H.W. Bush praised this bill for its assurance ``that people with disabilities [were] given the basic guarantees for which they have worked so long and so hard: independence, freedom of choice, control of their lives, and the opportunity to blend fully and equally into the rich mosaic of the American mainstream.'' His words were true when the ADA passed, and they are true today.

H.R. 620 would reverse decades of progress. It would pave the way for businesses to delay or completely avoid complying with the ADA, and shift the onus on people with disabilities to report noncompliance. If this bill were signed into law, it would effectively hold harmless places of public accommodation for willfully failing to comply with the

Mr. Speaker, our nation's food system is in a crisis right now, and it goes beyond the state of the farm economy. Between 2016 and 2017, it's estimated that the United States lost one-third of its honey bee colonies. Over the past decade, documented incidents of honey bee colony collapse disorder and other forms of excess bee mortality have been at a record high. Some beekeepers reported repeatedly losing 100 percent of their operations. While this may not sound like a crisis to some, these insects play a critical role in pollinating a number of our nation's crops.

Honey bees and native bees jointly provide U.S. agriculture an estimated $18 to $27 billion in pollination service annually. One of every three bites of food we eat is from a crop pollinated by bees. This dramatic decline threatens these crops, and thousands of scientific studies have implicated neonicotinoid pesticides, or neonics, as key contributors to this trend.

That's why today I am proud to reintroduce the Saving America's Pollinators Act. This bill would protect the health of honey bees and other critical pollinators and suspend the use of bee-toxic neonics. It also requires the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to complete a thorough assessment and ensure that any use of these insecticides does not cause unreasonable and adverse effects on pollinators.

The health of our food system depends on the health of our pollinators, and the EPA has a responsibility to get to the bottom of this issue. I urge my colleagues to join me and pass this legislation so that we can save our pollinators. The future of our food depends on it.

Mr. Speaker, had I been present for the vote today on H.R. 4533--To designate the health care system of the Department of Veterans Affairs in Lexington, Kentucky, as the ``Lexington VA Health Care System'' and to make certain other designations, (rollcall No. 70), I would have voted ``aye.''

Additionally, had I been present for the vote on H.R. 4979--To extend the Generalized System of Preference and to make technical changes to the competitive need limitations provision of the program (rollcall No. 71), I would have voted ``aye.''

Mr. Speaker, with all that is going on in Washington, D.C., these days, it is really hard to keep up with some things that are amazingly consequential. One item that is flying below the radar screen is the new Nuclear Posture Review from the Trump administration. They are talking about expanding our nuclear arsenal, embarking us on a path of spending $1.2 trillion.

Not only do we have more than we need already that we can't afford to use and pay for; we are talking about other elements here that are disturbing: developing new destabilizing nuclear weapons; being able to use nuclear weapons in nonnuclear situations, for example, responding to cyber attacks when you might not even know who did it.

We still have all these land based ballistic missiles in silos on hair-trigger alert. We just saw the vulnerability there in Hawaii with the recent mistaken threat of an attack send a whole state into panic.

We need to take a hard look at how to do this right before it is too late.

Mr. Speaker, had I been present for the vote on ordering the previous question on H. Res. 714 (Roll Call No. 47), I would have voted no. Additionally, had I been present for the vote on H. Res. 714, the rule providing for the consideration of the House amendment to Senate amendment to H.R. 695, the Fiscal Year 2018 Department of Defense Appropriations Act (Roll Call No. 48), I would have voted no.

Had I been present for the vote on the motion to concur in the Senate amendment with an Amendment to H.R. 695, the Fiscal Year 2018 Department of Defense Appropriations Act (Roll Call No. 49), I would have voted no. I voted against a nearly identical defense appropriations bill in July--and all the same issues remain.

Finally, had I been present for the vote on H.R. 4292, the Financial Institution Living Will Improvement Act of 2017 (Roll Call No. 50), I would have voted aye.

Mr. Speaker, had I been present for the vote today on S. 534, Protecting Young Victims from Sexual Abuse and Safe Sport Authorization Act (Roll Call No. 45), I would have voted aye. This bill would require authorization to interact with minor amateur athletes to report any suspected incidents of child abuse, including sexual abuse, to the sport's governing body.

Additionally, had I been present for the vote on H.R. 1457 (Roll Call No. 682), I would have voted aye. This bill would allow banks and other financial institutions nationwide to use an individual's state-issued driver's license or personal identification card to verify the individual's identity when using a mobile device to initiate mobile banking or other online service.