Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague.

I rise today in opposition to the rule and to H.R. 1900.

As many of my colleagues are aware, natural gas is extremely important to the State of Texas. It seems like every day more and more natural gas deposits are being found. More importantly, with the commercialization of horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing, we are now able to develop these resources effectively and economically, but that is only half the story. Once we have found these resources, we need a way to move them to market in a safe and environmentally responsible way.

In 1956, the United States decided it was in our best interest to build a network of highways. These highways, totaling approximately 47,000 miles, moved goods to market and dramatically expanded commerce. It may surprise some, but the interstate and intrastate pipeline system is approximately seven times larger than the highway system in the United States.

The natural gas pipeline system in this country is critical and extensive infrastructure. The permitting and review process that is required to site and construct pipelines in this country has ensured an environmental safety record that is second to none. That doesn't mean there aren't still going to be problems, when you consider the amount of miles we have.

Unfortunately, I can't support this particular bill. I support an expedited review process and expansion of the pipeline system. Our intrastate natural gas pipeline system is not broken. I cannot support a bill that would issue a license or permit or approval after merely an expired time line. In testimony in our committee, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the FERC, has an average of about a year turnaround.

I want to continue to support the construction of pipelines, and my ardent support is firmly backed by a safety record that is unmatched. I will continue to support an industry that has been an engine of our economic growth for the last decade.

This bill is a solution in search of a problem. I look forward to working with my colleagues in the future on another approach that will benefit all stakeholders, our environment, and our economy.

I encourage my colleagues to oppose the rule and the bill.

I thank my colleague. Although, I have to admit, sometimes I feel a little awkward listening to my colleagues' statements, but I am glad that report showed Texas is one of the more tougher States that regulates hydraulic fracturing.

Mr. Chairman, in the State of Texas, hydraulic fracturing has been a common practice for many years. The technique, combined with horizontal drilling, has made the idea of energy independence in the United States almost a reality.

Across the United States, the development of natural gas continues to power our economic engine and is the foundation of a manufacturing renaissance. Thus far, State agencies have done a great job of regulating hydraulic practices on State and private lands.

In Texas, the Railroad Commission--inappropriately named--has set a variety of standards that aim to protect the environment and allow for the development of this vital natural resource.

I am a firm believer in property rights and that whoever owns that land should have the right to regulate that land.

I would not support the Federal Government regulating the development of natural gas or the practice of hydraulic fracturing on State and/or private lands. More importantly, I cannot support the idea of legislation that would prevent the Federal Government from regulating Federal lands. Unfortunately, that is what this bill is asking us to do.

I understand and support the desire to develop our natural resources in the most economical way possible with as little bureaucratic red tape as possible. I know the significant advantage that the shale gas boom has provided our domestic petrochemical industry, various manufacturers, and a whole host of end-users.

Let's make sure, though, that the Department of the Interior does their job and does not have to transfer oversight of Federal lands to State lands. We need the Department of the Interior to allow resource development under Federal law.

I encourage my colleagues to oppose this bill. Hopefully, we will bring up a bill that will make the Department of the Interior actually let us produce on our Federal lands.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this unnecessary legislation. The President has stepped up to the plate, admitted he made a mistake, and took steps to remedy it. This legislation rolls back too many important provisions without doing anything good beyond what the President has already done.

I believe in the Affordable Care Act. This important legislation ended insurance company practices that prevented Americans from accessing quality health insurance. But, I am disappointed in how the law has been rolled out since October 1st. In fact, I think that we should extend open enrollment for an equal amount of time as the website has been down. Why are we not doing that today instead?

This law is too important to fumble the roll out. I represent an area that has one of the highest uninsured rates in the country. Our district also has one of the highest rates of people who have jobs but no health insurance. Before the ACA, the individual marketplace wasn't the right solution for our constituents and after the ACA, the individual marketplace is still not the right place.

The bill before us essentially restores the individual marketplace as it was prior to the ACA. It means insurance companies can refuse coverage because of pre-existing conditions and it means people can lose coverage because they have gotten too sick. I agree that we should allow people who are in the individual marketplace in 2013 and want to remain in it, to do so for another year.

But the bill today is yet another attempt to undo some of the best parts of this law: the minimum essential benefits and I cannot support it.

Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 587--Final Passage. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the three million Americans whose jobs are directly or indirectly connected to our nation's domestic automotive industry and the importance of our trade negotiators to address longstanding concerns with Japan's closed auto market.

This spring, the government of Japan announced it was going to join the United States and ten other Pacific Rim nations in negotiations in the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), a proposed comprehensive and high- standard free trade agreement with the aim of liberalizing nearly all goods and services within the member countries.

I am a strong proponent of increasing American exports. Exports are vital to expanding our economy, providing new opportunities for our nation's industries and entrepreneurs, and growing the number of well- paying, middle class jobs that are the backbone of our nation's strength.

Nevertheless, I have very strong reservations with Japan's longstanding barriers for auto exporters into its market. Japan has the third largest auto market in the world. At the same time, it ranks last among all advanced economies in terms of auto market import penetration at under six percent.

The barriers Japan places on auto imports are many and longstanding, including currency manipulation, onerous certification and regulatory standards, and anti-competitive networks between Japanese automakers, dealers, and parts suppliers, better known as the kieretsu system.

It is imperative that the Administration and this Congress take action to ensure that Japan will open its auto market to American-made cars and trucks before lowering our tariffs and opening our market even more to Japanese auto imports.

There are several protections our negotiators should secure from our Japanese allies before finalizing this trade deal, including strong and enforceable currency disciplines aimed at preventing TPP countries from using currency to gain a competitive advantage, seeing to it that Japanese automakers fully honor internationally recognized labor standards and allow workers to organize and collectively bargain, and apply strong and effective tariff ``snapbacks'' that will come into force in the event of a trade violation.

Congress should also act by passing the Currency Reform for Fair Trade Act, which I have proudly co-sponsored for the past three Congresses, and would give the Treasury Department and other federal agencies additional tools to combat currency manipulation.

I fear that our domestic auto manufacturers and the hundreds of thousands of American families whose livelihoods rely on our auto industry will be gravely harmed if the Administration and Congress allow our tariffs on Japanese autos to be lowered even further without giving equal access to American-made cars and trucks.

The well-respected Center for Automotive Research found last year that Japan's inclusion in TPP, combined with the on-going currency manipulation Japan has been doing, would result in the loss of 225,000 cars and trucks being made in the U.S. and the loss of nearly 100,000 American jobs.

Failing to open Japan's auto market will only increase our trade deficit, which now stands at $76 billion a year, with $53 billion of the deficit comes from autos alone.

Mr. Speaker, it is our duty, as the elected representatives of the American people, to make sure that trade with Japan is truly two-way and Japan will open its markets to American products as we've opened our markets to their imports.

Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 570, had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''

Mr. Chair, I strongly support the Water Resources, Reform, and Development Act. WRDA is an important bill for my area. We have critical flood control projects and our Port of Houston, which is the largest port for foreign tonnage in the country, is an economic engine for the entire region.

I prefer the Senate language in some ways, especially the funding for dredging at our ports. But, the bill in front of us represents the hard work of both sides of the T&I committee and I appreciate the leadership that they have shown on this issue and I look forward to supporting it.

I am pleased that Chairman Shuster and Ranking Member Rahall included language in the managers amendment that my colleagues and I from the Houston area requested regarding assumption of maintenance. This language is important because we want to incentivize entities like Ports to take on some of the responsibilities for deepening and widening channels and other projects, but we have to make sure that the federal government lives up to their responsibility to assume the maintenance. I want to make sure that the language that was included is the best way to accomplish this and I look forward to working with the Army Corps of Engineers, the Port of Houston, and our committee leadership to make any necessary changes and I am pleased that they are working with us toward achieving our policy intent.

I support this bill and encourage my colleagues to do the same.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to have it noted in the Congressional Record that I was not able to be in Washington on October 14, 2013 for votes because of events in the district.

If I had been here, I would have voted as follows:

On the motion to table the appeal of the ruling of the Chair, roll No. 547, I would have voted ``no.''

On the passage of H.J. Res. 80, roll No. 548, I would have voted ``no.''

On agreeing to the Grayson amendment, roll No. 549, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, 17 days ago, I came to the House floor to talk about how disappointed I was that a topic of such importance, the medical device tax repeal or delay, was being reduced to the level of political squabbling over whether we are going to continue the function of the government, but here we go again. We are here again to vote on that same policy 17 days later, but we have further delved into the realm of pettiness because the Republican leadership continues to insist that our economy's future should be tied to whether Members of Congress, Cabinet members, the President, and our staffs should have the same health care insurance that other Federal employees receive.

I am surprised. Are we really going to keep the United States Government shut down and threaten the full faith and credit of our country based on whether Members of Congress, our staffs, and the President and Cabinet get the same health care that thousands of other Federal employees get? It is bordering on pettiness. It sounds so silly to be able to deal with this.

I was fortunate enough. I worked 23 years at a company at which they not only subsidized my health insurance, but they paid for my family's. Governments all over the country do that. The State of Texas, where I am proud to be from, pays for health insurance for State employees. The City of Houston has a health insurance plan for their employees that they help pay for. Harris County does it. All governments do that. Frankly, I represent a lot of petrochemical refineries and plants. Exxon, Shell, the ones who are serving our area, all of them have ``subsidies,'' as the Republicans call it, for the health care for their employees; and yet, on the floor of the House, we think it is a dirty word.

Our goal with the Affordable Care Act was to have everyone in the country have access to quality health care, not just because you got to work for the government or work for an Exxon or a Shell, which are great companies--everyone. So that was the goal of it. If you look at the national exchanges, if we ever get the computers fixed, we will see that. People will have the option to be able to have the same options that we have as Members of Congress or as Federal employees or that I had in the private business that I helped manage. That is what we are talking about.

But to put that in a continuing resolution to open up the government and to make it that you have to vote for this or we are not going to pay the TSA, who screens us when we go into the airport--they are working, but they are worried about getting their paychecks; so is the military; so are a lot of folks. But to make that the end-all, the be- all--I can't believe our forefathers and our veterans sacrificed for our country to make sure we have this freedom--to lower it to the level of we are not going to vote for this unless we can take away the President's health care or the Cabinet officials' or the Members of Congress'.

Our constituents expect us to act more responsibly. We should be ashamed of what this House of Representatives has come to over the last number of months, because we need to talk about making sure our country continues to grow. What is so sad is that, last week, some of us were briefed that every week of the government shutdown costs 0.3 percent of our gross domestic product. We want jobs, but here we are, 2 weeks and going on 3 weeks into the shutdown, and we are adding to that unemployment because of what the Federal Government is doing.

Again, we should be embarrassed at what the House of Representatives is doing. Let us pass a continuing resolution. Let us pay our debts that this House of Representatives has voted for.

Every appropriations bill, every dime of that $17 trillion passed this House of Representatives. Why would we not want to pay those debts? That is like my saying in Texas, Oh, I don't want to pay my house note. Well, maybe they will not come after me the first month, but under Texas law, in 90 days, you are going to get your house sold from under you if you don't pay your debts.

The Federal Government at various times has not paid its debts, one by technical glitch in 1979, but the last time we didn't pay our debts was when the British army burned the Treasury. I would hope this stance we have now is not compared to the British army burning our Treasury.

We need to pass a continuing resolution, deal with our budget, and make sure we don't hurt the full faith and credit of our country.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in recognition of 102nd anniversary of National Day for the Republic of China, commonly known as Taiwan.

October 10th, or Double Ten Day, as it is better known in Taiwan, commemorates the first day of the Chinese Revolution, which overthrew the Qing Dynasty and lead to the founding of the Republic of China on January 1, 1912.

National Day is celebrated throughout the island of Taiwan and in many Chinese-American communities here in the U.S., including in my hometown of Houston, Texas. National Day is commonly celebrated with large parades, entertainment and folk performances, fireworks, and recognition of Sun Yat-sen, the first president and founding father of the Republic of China.

It is important that this chamber and American people join the Republic of China and the Chinese-American community in celebrating this day. The Republic of China was an important ally to the United States in World War II and the Cold War and has continued to be one of our country's biggest partners in peace and prosperity in the Asia- Pacific Region.

Today, Taiwan and the United States enjoy a dynamic trading relationship in both goods and services. Taiwan was the 11th largest U.S. trading partner in 2012 and is a major innovator and producer of information technology products. Taiwan is an important market for our Nation's agriculture, chemicals, and semiconductor industries.

In 1996, Taiwan became the first Chinese democracy in the world when it held its first direct presidential elections and had held successful presidential elections every four years since then and acts as an important example that democracy can flourish for the Chinese people on both sides of the Taiwan Straits.

America should continue its strong support for the people of Taiwan and we can do this by supporting Taiwan's entrance into international and multilateral organizations and agreements. Earlier this year, this House passed legislation supporting Taiwan's entrance into the International Civil Aviation Organization. Mr. Speaker, I encourage this chamber to continue to vote on similar legislation, voice the American people's support for a prosperous and democratic Taiwan, and congratulate Taiwan on its National Day.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to associate myself with the remarks of my colleague and classmate from South Carolina on how we will miss Chairman Young. He has been a great statesman in serving our House.

But today I am here to talk about how we are 10 days into the Republican shutdown of the government services. Every week the shutdown continues cuts 0.3 percent of our gross domestic product, and the stock market has dropped 900 points in the last 2 weeks. Now they want to hold the full faith and credit of our country hostage.

This is how it is hurting our Houston area economy:

Over 3,100 NASA employees at Johnson Space Center in Houston have been furloughed as a result of the House majority's refusal to keep the government open;

The Small Business Administration has closed its Houston office and is unable to issue grants and loans and services to small business owners;

Houston's regional VA center is closed. The government shutdown has forced VA to furlough 9,000 employees, delaying processing of the VA benefits.

If the shutdown continues into late October, payments for more than 3.8 million veterans will stop. We owe it to our Nation's veterans to make good on our commitments to them, and we can't do this with closed facilities.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to voice my opposition to H.J. Res. 84, the Head Start for Low-Income Children Act. While I appreciate the concern for the harmful effects of the shutdown on Head Start and am deeply troubled by the children cut off from Head Start services, I am unable to support this funding bill. A far better approach to undoing the damage caused by this shutdown is to pass a clean continuing resolution, CR, that funds the entire government.

On the heels of devastating sequester cuts which caused more than 57,000 children to lose their Head Start slots--over 4,000 of whom live in Texas--this shutdown continues to harm even more of America's most vulnerable families. Already, thousands of children have been affected by Head Start program closures and reduced services due to a lack of federal support from this crisis and thousands more children are at risk of losing their seats in classrooms as the shutdown continues.

However, this piecemeal approach to funding Head Start fails to provide America's children with the same support as a fully operational government through a clean CR. The populations served by Head Start often rely on many other vital programs that provide critical assistance to students who are most in need, such as the National School Lunch Program, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), special education programs, and Title I programs, none of which are included in this funding bill.

The implication of students losing vital classroom time, nutrition, and instruction is severe and only makes the mission of improving student achievement and closing achievement gaps that much more difficult.

I urge my colleagues to immediately pass a clean CR and reopen the full government so we can put an end to the current political stalemate and bring the focus back on undoing the harmful effects of the sequester.

Mr. Speaker and Members, I want to wish a congratulations to our Republican majority and a thank you for bringing a bill to the floor that would guarantee the pay for the furloughed Federal employees. The essential employees who are already working will be paid from existing law, so now we pass it to the Senate where those furloughed employees will be able to be paid.

My question of the majority Republicans is: now that we're going to pay these furloughed employees, let's bring them back to work. Why would we not bring them back to work if we're paying for them?

I've heard of people being paid not to work, but I've never heard it from the Republican majority before that. I voted for it, and it passed unanimously out of the House, but let's bring those folks back to work. Let's reopen this government, and let's bring back those dedicated Federal employees so they don't have to stand down there and stop our veterans from going to the World War II Memorial.

They're the folks who are working on all of the things that make our country great, so let's bring them back to work. We can do that. We are going to pay them. Let's let them come back and do their jobs.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize the tens of thousands of men and women who work in one of the fastest growing manufacturing regions in America, Houston and Harris County, Texas.

Today is National Manufacturing Day. In our district, which covers the Port of Houston and the Houston Ship Channel, there are over 125 chemical manufacturers, refiners and supporting facilities, employing over 33,000 people.

The chemical, oil, and gas industries are the new face of manufacturing in America. Houston is the energy capital of the world and has benefited from this energy renaissance taking place in Texas and the gulf coast. Houston has been the national leader in job creation in recent years and was named America's number one exporting region by the Department of Commerce in July of this year, sending over $110 billion in manufactured exports overseas.

I proudly stand with America's manufacturing sector, which is the backbone of our Nation's economy and our middle class. I look forward to this Chamber taking up legislation this Congress to provide the support and statutory clarity our manufacturers need to continue being the international leader in innovation and exports.

Mr. Speaker and Members, here we are, Day 4 of the government shutdown, all because the Republican majority didn't get their way on a bill 3 years ago.

They're so obsessed, in fact, with eliminating the Affordable Care Act that they're willing to risk the functions of the United States Government, just to prove a point. It's really amazing and, yet, so sad.

And now that they've seen the polls and realize the American people don't support what they're doing, their response is to pass a few bills to only reopen a few agencies within the government. Again, amazing.

We need to open the whole government. And yet, congressional Republicans don't care about the consequences of a shutdown, even though they're significant.

Thousands of people are furloughed. Critical programs and services across the country have been shuttered, and all because congressional Republicans are in denial of the Affordable Care Act. It is the law of land and has been for 3 years, and has survived 42 legislative attempts to repeal it.

It's time to move on. This is not a serious, responsible way to run the United States of America, and you know it. Stop playing games and pass a clean continuing resolution.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.J. Res. 72, the partisan resolution that would cut over $6 billion from our nation's veterans from what this House passed in June.

There are many issues that divide our two parties. One of the issues that has always received bipartisan support is supporting our nation's heroes and their families.

Unfortunately, due to the extreme views of some in the Majority, this chamber is now considering a resolution which would cut $6.2 billion from the VA and excludes funding for several VA programs which are vital to the thousands of veterans in my district, including national veterans' cemeteries, medical and prosthetic research, and grants for state veterans homes and state cemeteries.

Mr. Speaker, our nation's veterans deserve better and I call on this chamber to demand a vote to fully fund the VA for the entire year.

Every day that goes by without providing full appropriations for the VA is another day that our brave veterans are being harmed and denied the support and services they paid for in blood, sweat, and sacrifice.