Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I was detained and missed the vote. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall No. 335.

Stated against:

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Louisiana, Representative Johnson, for arranging this Special Order to highlight the deviously entitled Women's Health Protection Act and for giving us the opportunity to speak up for the unborn.

With this bill, the Democrats have actually sought to remove protections for women and their babies enacted by State legislatures across the country. These protections include ensuring that abortion providers have the most basic of medical credentials, admitting privileges at a hospital should an emergency arise as a result of an abortion.

The bill would also preclude abortion clinics from providing information relevant to a woman's right to know, including an ultrasound prior to the procedure.

By removing these protections and the right of women to be fully informed, the supporters of this bill are exposing women to injury and death and, in many cases, a lifetime of sorrow and regret.

There is another loss that is suffered. In the loss of millions of lives not lived, this Nation has lost incalculable talent, intellect, and achievement of those who never lived to bless us with the gifts they surely possessed. These are children who could have been great teachers, doctors, inventors, artists, and spiritual leaders. Our lives are less today because we never gave them the chance to live.

These were lives that deserved protection. This bill denies the reality of what we have lost and ignores the great potential of children whose lives will be taken if this bill passes.

Tonight, I stand in this Chamber to declare that the lives of those lost to abortion mattered, and we are less as a Nation because of it.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues, both Democrats and Republicans, to oppose this bill and to stand not just for the lives of unborn children but also for the enormous potential that those lives have.

Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to vote ``no'' on H.R. 3755 and embrace life and all its potential.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 2467.

This misguided bill treats all PFAS chemicals the same way, creating a de facto ban on many lifesaving products that Americans rely on.

By voting for this bill, my Democratic colleagues are ignoring the science, including peer-reviewed research that clearly shows that certain fluoropolymers, including some that have been used for more than 50 years, do not present a concern for human health or the environment.

Despite this evidence, my Democrat colleagues have refused to make reasonable changes to this bill so that fluoropolymer chemicals used in FDA-approved medical devices are not labeled hazardous substances under CERCLA and the Clean Air Act.

Let me put it bluntly. By not exempting the fluoropolymers used in medical devices already approved by

the FDA, you are denying people access to lifesaving products such as heart valves for infants and grafts for aortic aneurysm repairs.

I ask my Democrat colleagues: Are you so opposed to all categories of PFAS chemicals that you commit to refusing all medical devices and drugs containing the fluoropolymers you are banning?

If you must have open-heart surgery, will you instruct your doctor to avoid using any device or surgical instrument that has fluoropolymers regardless of the implications for the outcome?

If your child or grandchild needs an FDA-approved heart valve, do you commit to denying them that care since it contains fluoropolymers?

That is what you are trying to force on the general population with this legislation.

Furthermore, this bill will put millions of Americans who have already received medical devices containing fluoropolymers at risk. As noted in committee by my colleague, Dr. Larry Bucshon, with the passage of this bill, the FDA might have to designate all devices with any fluoropolymers as hazardous and recall them.

There is bipartisan agreement on the need to protect the public from harmful PFAS chemicals, but there is no rational reason why lifesaving fluoropolymers could not be exempted.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this bill.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor and remember the lives tragically lost last week in the terrible car crash on Interstate 65. Last Saturday was a heartbreaking day for Alabama. Ten lives were taken at once in terrible, unexpected circumstances on one of our state's central interstates. I was heartbroken to hear that so many of the crash victims were children from the Tallapoosa County Girls Ranch, which is part of the Alabama Sheriffs' Boys and Girls ranches. The Tallapoosa County Girls Ranch has provided safety and care for thousands of neglected children since its founding in the 1960s. I want to extend my deepest condolences to the parents, friends, and siblings who are grieving in the wake of this crash. In particular, I want to send my sympathies to the director of the Girls' Ranch, Mrs. Candice Gulley, and her husband, who lost their two children and two nephews in the accident. Few can imagine what they must be going through. I honor their dedication to the children in their care for so many years, and I trust that our state will come around them during this time of grief. My prayers are with the ranch and with all who lost loved ones in this tragedy

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 18, the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act. This bill codifies the Hyde amendment which ensures that taxpayer dollars aren't spent on abortions.

For over 40 years, both Democrats and Republicans have understood the value of this important protection which has saved more than 2.4 million lives. The right to life precedes all other rights and is fundamental to everything I believe.

I urge my colleagues across the aisle to embrace life and support H.R. 18. As President Biden said in 1994, ``Those of us who are opposed to abortion should not be compelled to pay for them.''

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Committees on Energy and Commerce, Ways and Means, and the Judiciary be discharged from further consideration of H.R. 18, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Madam Speaker, I rise to celebrate a life well-lived.

Frederick Aurelius ``Rele'' Evans passed away last month at the age of 94. After graduating high school in Tuscaloosa, he joined the Navy. After his service, he enrolled at Tulane University and earned a bachelor of science in electrical engineering.

Following his college graduation, he joined the Air Force and became a fighter pilot, protecting Strategic Air Command while stationed in Sioux City, Iowa.

Following his time in the military, he became employed as a test pilot for Hughes Aircraft and later worked for TRW. While working for TRW, he earned a Ph.D. in aerospace engineering at UCLA, specializing in control systems theory.

Rele was the lead guidance engineer at Cape Canaveral when John Glenn was put into orbit, and he designed the on-board computer's guidance system for the lunar lander. He also coauthored the formula to put Apollo on the Moon and was present at Mission Control when Neil Armstrong took one giant leap for mankind. He eventually returned to Alabama.

Madam Speaker, I am grateful for the contributions Rele made to our military, our space program, and the State of Alabama. I wish his family the best as they mourn the loss of this modest man who accomplished much.

Madam Speaker, with the stroke of his pen, President Biden canceled more than the Keystone XL pipeline. He canceled the jobs of over 1,000 men and women.

Each one of these jobs is a real person with real hopes for themselves and their families who are now out of work because they did not have a Biden administration ``approved job.'' The workforce that works on our energy sector is as diverse as our nation.

Madam Speaker, 24 percent of pipeline construction workers are women, and another 24 percent are minorities. The Biden administration is telling these pipeline workers their careers are over and to find a green job that they are not trained to do and that does not pay as much. They are telling single moms and single dads that they have to give up the jobs that supported their families.

Joe Biden should not destroy the jobs that support the workers and families who have provided the fuel for the American economy and that has lowered energy costs for American families.

Madam Speaker, this is an economic injustice that should not be tolerated. These workers and their families deserve better.

Mr. Speaker, a bill trampling on the Second Amendment rights of the American people is a convenient distraction from the actual crisis in the United States. There are over almost 11,000 people killed by drunk drivers each year. There were more than 81,000 drug overdose deaths in the United States in the 12 months ending last May. But we are here today debating a bill to further restrict the rights of law-abiding citizens.

I just heard it mentioned about domestic violence. You could have a woman, threatened by an ex-boyfriend or a husband, who feels her life is being threatened, who would not be able to acquire a firearm once she needed it. She would have to wait at least 10 days.

The vast majority of illicit drugs, like heroin and fentanyl, leading to these 81,000 deaths are crossing our southern border. Instead of addressing these issues, President Biden has reinstituted catch and release, and now, we have an overwhelming surge of illegal crossings on our southern border.

According to the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency, in 2018 alone, there were 1,641 illegal aliens convicted of homicide. How many more will it be now that the Democrats have signaled that our borders are wide open?

This bill reflects an obsession with gun restrictions by my Democrat colleagues. Meanwhile, in 2018, more than one in six homicides were committed without a firearm of any type: 1,500 were killed with knives or cutting instruments, more than 400 with blunt instruments, and more than 600 with hands and feet. Only 403 died as a result of a rifle of any kind.

Mr. Speaker, these numbers are dwarfed by the loss of life from the failure of the Democrats to enforce their laws.

Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to this Amendment and to the underlying legislation which is another attack on our 2nd amendment rights. This bill trampling on the 2nd Amendment rights of the American people is a convenient distraction from the other actual crises in the United States.

There were almost 11,000 people killed by drunk drivers in 2018. There were more than 81,000 drug overdose deaths in the United States in the 12 months ending last May . . . but we are here today debating a bill to further restrict the rights of law-abiding citizens.

This bill endangers women threatened by domestic violence from an ex- boyfriend or ex-husband. A woman who feels her life is threatened would not be able to acquire a firearm when she needed one, under this bill she would have to wait at least 10 days.

The vast majority of the most deadly illicit drugs like heroin and fentanyl are smuggled across our southern border. Instead of addressing these issues President Biden has reinstituted catch and release and we now have an overwhelming surge of illegals crossing our southern border. According to a report from the Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency, in 2018 there were 1,641 illegal aliens convicted of homicide. How many more will it be now that the Democrats have signaled that our borders are wide open?

Yet we are here debating a bill to take away the rights of law- abiding men and women to acquire firearms to protect themselves.

This bill reflects an obsession with gun restrictions by my Democrat colleagues. In terms of homicides, more than 1 in 6 do not involve a firearm of any type. According to the FBI, in 2017 over 1,500 people were killed with knives or cutting instruments, more than 400 were killed with blunt instruments and more than 600 killed with hands, fists and feet. There were only 403 homicides committed with a rifle of any type, including a semi-automatic AR-15 that is the target of many Democrat anti-gun activists.

I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment and the underlying bill.

Madam Speaker, if my Democrat colleagues were serious about making elections fair and honest, they would start by enforcing a law they passed, the National Voter Registration Act of 1993.

That law requires that every State and every county maintain accurate voter files. Yet, the Pew Research Center reported that there are 24 million people improperly registered. 1.8 million of them are dead. 2.7 million are registered in more than one State. The State of Michigan is 105 percent registered to vote, with 16 counties that are between 110 and 119 percent registered. Pennsylvania has over 800,000 inactive voters still on the State's voter registration files, and Los Angeles County has 1.6 million more people registered to vote than live in the county who are qualified to vote.

There are 17 Democrat Members still serving in this Congress who voted for that law, including the Speaker and the majority leader. If you were serious about cleaning up our elections, you would enforce that law.

As if the Federal takeover of elections isn't enough, this bill would also force taxpayers to foot the bill for campaigns.

Just a few weeks ago, the majority stripped my colleague, Marjorie Taylor Greene, of her committee assignments. This week, though, they seem to believe that even though she isn't allowed to serve on any standing committees, she should receive taxpayer-financed campaign contributions.

Based on the formula in this bill and what Representative Greene has raised already, this bill would give her over $7 million. Every Democrat who voted to strip her of her committee assignments has cosponsored the bill that will send over $7 million of taxpayer money to fund her reelection.

If this bill passes, it will create a ruling class and tremendously undermine Americans' right to self-government. In fact, this bill should be called for the permanent ruling class act.

No one who truly wants fair and honest elections, no one who wants people to have faith that their vote counts, will vote for this bill.

Madam Speaker, if my Democrat colleagues were serious about making elections fair and honest they would start by enforcing a law they passed--The National Voter Registration Act of 1993. That law requires that every state and every county maintain accurate voter files. Yet the Pew Research Center reported that there are 24 million people improperly registered . . . 1.8 million are dead, 2.7 million are registered to vote in more than one state. The state of Michigan is 105 percent registered to vote with sixteen counties with voter registration between 110-119 percent.

Pennsylvania has over 800,000 inactive voters still on the state's voter registration files and Los Angeles County had 1.6 million more people registered to vote than people living in the county who are qualified to vote. The failure to maintain accurate voter files is an invitation for election fraud. If my Democrat colleagues are serious about restoring confidence in our elections they should be pushing states to comply with the law. There are 17 Democrat members still serving in this Congress who voted for the National Voter Registration Act including the Speaker and the Majority Leader. Why aren't they pushing for cleaning up our voter registration files in every state?

As if the federal takeover of elections wasn't enough, this bill would also force taxpayers to foot the bill for campaigns. Just a few weeks ago the majority stripped my colleague Marjorie Taylor Greene of her committee assignments. This week they seem to believe that though she isn't allowed to serve on any standing committees she should receive taxpayer financed campaign contributions. Based on the formula in this bill and what Rep. Greene has raised already this bill would give her over $7 million. Every Democrat who voted to strip Rep. Greene of her committees has also co-sponsored the bill that would send over 7 million dollars to fund her re-election.

If this bill passes it will create a ruling class and tremendously undermine Americans' right to self-government. In fact, this bill should be called the For The Permanent Ruling Class Act. No one who truly wants fair and honest elections, No one who wants the American people to trust our elections, to have faith that their vote counts, will vote for this bill.

Mr. Speaker, millions of American school children will soon have missed a year of in-person instruction, and we may have inflicted permanent damage on some of them and on our country.

The educational losses are disproportionately the fault of Democratic Governors and mayors. Those are not my words but the content of an article in The New York Times.

The article goes on to say: ``The blunt fact is that it is Democrats, including those who run the West Coast, from California through Oregon to Washington State, who have presided over one of the worst blows to the education of disadvantaged Americans in history. The result: more dropouts, less literacy and numeracy, widening race gaps, and long-term harm to some of our most marginalized youth.''

The article continues: ``As many as 3 million children in the United States have missed all formal education, in-person or virtual, for almost a year.''

Democrat policies leaving schools closed have inflicted a pandemic of depression, anxiety, behavioral problems, drug abuse, and suicide among school-age children. You said this bill will get children back in school, but the funds in this bill that are education-related have nothing to do with reopening schools. It leaves them closed.

I hope parents of the children who are locked out of their schools are watching what you are doing, how you have abandoned their children in favor of your powerful political friends. I can only hope they never forget that, at the moment they needed you to step up and do the right thing, you failed them and their children.

Mr. Speaker, millions of American schoolchildren will soon have missed a year of in-person instruction, and we may have inflicted permanent damage on some of them, and on

our country. The educational losses are disproportionately the fault of Democratic governors and mayors who too often let schools stay closed even as bars opened.

Those are not my words, but the content of an article in the New York Times. The Times article goes on to say, The blunt fact is that it is Democrats--including those who run the West Coast, from California through Oregon to Washington State--who have presided over one of the worst blows to the education of disadvantaged Americans in history. The result: more dropouts, less literacy and numeracy, widening race gaps, and long-term harm to some of our most marginalized youth.

It continues, The San Francisco Federal Reserve Bank this month estimated that educational disruptions during this pandemic may increase the number of high school dropouts over 10 years by 3.8 percent, while also reducing the number of college-educated workers in the labor force. This will shrink the incomes of Americans for 70 years, until the last of today's students leave the work force, the bank said.

As many as three million children in the United States have missed all formal education, in-person or virtual, for almost a year.

Finally, The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found, ``in- person learning in schools has not been associated with substantial community transmission.'' The British Medical Journal this week put it this way in an editorial: ``Closing schools is not evidence based and harms children.'' I remind you, this is from the New York Times.

Democrat policies have inflicted a pandemic of depression, anxiety, behavioral problems, drug abuse, and suicide among school-age children. Democrats, including President Biden, have said you will follow the science on school openings, but that is not what is being done. You said this bill will help get children back in school, but instead, you are bailing out the teachers' union's pension plans, building a bridge in New York, constructing an underground tunnel in Silicon Valley, bailing out incompetently run state governments, lavishing money on museums and the arts. The funds in this bill that are education-related have nothing to do with reopening schools. It leaves them closed.

I hope parents of the children who are locked out of their schools are watching what you are doing, how you have abandoned their children in favor of your powerful political friends. I can only hope they never forget that at the moment they needed you to step up and do the right thing . . . you failed them and their children.

I urge my colleagues to vote NO on this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to comment on H.R. 803, specifically, the debate I just heard.

This bill does not protect public lands, it turns them into economic deserts off limits to public use and sensible management practices. At some point we must recognize the damage that is done by these left-wing land grabs, to our economy, our communities, and even to our national security when we make critical resources off limits.

My Democratic colleagues are advocating land use and management policies that are entirely misguided. As I listen to my Democratic colleagues' speeches, I heard an almost religious devotion to the sites covered by this legislation.

When I heard one Member talk about protecting the Grand Canyon from mining, even though mining is already prohibited there, I couldn't help wondering what my colleagues would think if it turned out the Grand Canyon was the result of an ancient mining company. It would probably be fine if it fit their agenda.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 21, the FedRAMP Authorization Act, introduced by my distinguished colleague and friend, Representative Gerry Connolly.

Cybersecurity and technology modernization are both vital issues to ensure this government runs efficiently and effectively. This is even clearer in light of the unprecedented recent cyberattack that compromised both the private and public sectors' critical information systems. Congress must work to further the Federal Government's cybersecurity while moving Federal agencies to more modern solutions, which will help keep our public data safe and provide improved services to our Nation's citizens.

The Federal Risk and Authorization Program, or FedRAMP, is the main Federal program focused on helping agencies procure secure cloud computing services. The FedRAMP provides a consistent process for agencies to procure modern cloud systems in accordance with established Federal cybersecurity standards. Recent Federal policies make the focus on securing cloud services especially important.

With both the Cloud First initiative in 2011 and the Cloud Smart initiative from President Trump's administration, the government continues to focus on adopting modern, cost-effective cloud technology solutions.

The Federal Government is plagued by reoccurring problems in information technology, such as low asset utilization, duplicative systems, and fragmented resources. Shifting to the cloud provides for improved asset utilization, increased innovation, and more agile and responsive technology capabilities. These improved efficiencies have led to significant cost savings.

In fiscal year 2018, the government spent roughly $6.5 billion on cloud computing, with 84 percent coming from FedRAMP authorized cloud computing providers.

The centralized security authorization process offered by the FedRAMP program has saved agencies over $250 million in cost avoidance, according to the General Services Administration.

Recognizing these cost benefits, this legislation aims to increase the Federal Government's use of the consistent, centrally managed cloud computing security authorizations provided by the FedRAMP program. Codifying this successful program into law is an important step towards encouraging Federal agencies to take full advantage of this program and all the security benefits that it offers.

Mr. Speaker, again, I thank my colleague, Representative Connolly, for introducing this bill. I urge my colleagues to support the bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers. I am prepared to close, and I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, protecting our public's valuable information by improving the

Federal Government's cybersecurity and adopting modern technology should be a top priority of Congress.

I look forward to working together on issues like this that are in the best interest of the Nation. I strongly urge my colleagues to support this legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 22, the Congressional Budget Justification Transparency Act.

The Congressional Budget Justification Transparency Act is a long- overdue reform that would ensure Congress and the Nation's taxpayers can understand the full scope and context of the annual Federal budget.

I thank my colleagues, Congressman Mike Quigley and Ranking Member James Comer, for working together on this important bipartisan legislation.

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 22 will truly open up the executive branch annual budget request and provide needed transparency of each agency's detailed budget justifications. The American public and each of their congressional Representatives deserve full access to the annual agency plans to spend their hard-earned tax dollars.

This past year alone, the Federal Government spent more than $6.5 trillion. Public spending transparency resources, like USAspending.gov, are currently helping the public track ongoing agency spending activity. However, the annual congressional budget justifications provide detailed and plain language explanations of how each Federal agency plans to spend congressional appropriations.

Currently, these valuable budget documents are sent directly to congressional appropriators and are then posted across hundreds of disconnected agency web pages. This makes them extremely hard to track down.

H.R. 22 simply requires the budget justifications of every agency to be made publicly available on a single website. To do this, the bill requires the Office of Management and Budget to issue a full listing of agency budget justifications and the individual agency web pages where they are posted. This will assure the public that they have access to the complete publication of these authoritative budget resources.

The bill also requires the U.S. Treasury Department to centrally publish all the materials on USAspending.gov as open data.

As established in 2014 by the DATA Act, USAspending.gov is quickly becoming the primary public resource for the public to track how the government is using their tax dollars. Adding congressional budget justifications to USAspending.gov will provide even better context to agency spending activity.

Thanks to another House Committee on Oversight and Reform-produced law, the 2018 Good Accounting Obligation in Government Act, congressional budget justifications also now list unimplemented inspector general audit and GAO report recommendations. This means H.R. 22 will also help Congress and the public annually track open IG and GAO oversight recommendations.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Illinois (Mr. Quigley). I urge my colleagues to support this legislation, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers, and I am prepared to close.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I strongly urge my colleagues to support this commonsense transparency legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 23, the Inspector General Protection Act. I want to thank Representatives Ted Lieu and Jody Hice for working together on this legislation.

H.R. 23 will help Congress track Federal agency inspectors general vacancies and make sure they are filled by the President in a timely manner.

Inspectors general help combat Federal fraud, waste, and abuse and improve the operations of the executive branch departments and agencies. Inspectors general help Congress shine light on areas of the government that need improvement and oversight. However, both Republican and Democratic administrations have experienced numerous and prolonged inspector general vacancies.

The Inspector General Protection Act would simply require the President to notify Congress of any change to a current inspector general's employment status. The bill would also require the President to notify Congress if a nomination to replace an inspector general does not take place within 210 days.

These provisions will improve congressional oversight of the executive branch by providing transparency to the President's inspectors general nominations.

Inspectors general are an indispensable resource to Congress and to the American people, and Congress can reaffirm our responsibility to combating government waste, fraud, and abuse by assuring consistent Federal agency inspector general office leadership.

I urge my colleagues to support the bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield as much time as he may consume to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Jordan).

Mr. Speaker, I hope we can continue to find bipartisan ways to build on similar good government reforms, such as this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I strongly urge my colleagues to support this commonsense legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 26, the Construction Consensus Procurement Improvement Act of 2021. This bill would prohibit the Federal Government's use of reverse auctions for complex design and construction services. A reverse auction is one where the sellers bid down the price instead of the buyers driving up the price. Most often, the contractor with the lowest bid wins the contract. While we all wish for the Federal Government to get the lowest price, it is important that these complex projects are done properly, on time, and on budget.

Reverse auctions are not always appropriate for the types of services this bill deals with because design-build or complex construction projects often have variables which cannot be contemplated during the original bidding process.

The use of reverse auctions can often result in products that are subpar and, ultimately, over budget. Often, the winning low bid is nowhere near the final cost to the government after unanticipated factors lead to time and budget overruns.

Specifically, the Office of Federal Procurement Policy found that, for complex design and construction contracts, the expertise required to complete these projects was not built in to reverse auction bids.

Construction projects have a high degree of variability and the reverse auction process often does not yield the low costs intended for the taxpayer. This legislation is tailored to ensure that products and services which do not benefit from the reverse auction process will not be affected.

Going forward, we must continue to fight for the best possible products at the best price to the taxpayer. That includes ensuring benefits are brought to our constituents on time and on budget. This legislation will help to achieve that.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague, Representative Ro Khanna, for his work and support on this legislation. I urge my colleagues to support the bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Comer).

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

Mr. Speaker, this is a sensible and needed bipartisan reform. I am hopeful to see similar bipartisan procurement reform bills this Congress, and I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

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