Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I was detained during the vote series on April 14, 2021. Had I been present, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call No. S. 578

Madam Speaker, I rise with immense pride to celebrate the 91st birthday of my grandfather, Gerald L. Potter Sr.

Gerald is a resident of Allegheny Township in Westmoreland County, Pennsylvania. As a veteran, Gerald served in the United States Air Force and as a reservist at the 911th Airlift Wing in southwestern Pennsylvania. During his military service, he met his wife of fifty years, my grandmother Eleen M. Potter, a lieutenant in the Air Force Nursing Corps. Continuing his dedication to service, Gerald attended the West Penn Hospital School of Nursing and graduated in their first male class. My grandfather's service and mentorship played a critical role throughout my childhood, during my service in the United States Navy, and his example continues to guide my work on behalf of Pennsylvania's 14th Congressional District.

Madam Speaker, Gerald L. Potter Sr. has lived a life of distinction and remains an incredible presence in my life, our family and friends, and his community. It is with great joy that I wish him a happy 91st birthday.

Madam Speaker, the rule before us today provides for consideration of H.R. 6, a bill creating a pathway to citizenship for millions of people who entered this country illegally, while it does nothing to enforce our immigration laws or secure our borders.

You heard that right. This bill does nothing to enforce our immigration laws. It does nothing to secure our borders. And it does so as a record number of illegal immigrants pour across our Southern border. And yet, House Democrats are passing a bill that will further incentivize illegal immigration and will worsen the Biden border crisis.

The numbers speak for themselves. Over 100,000 migrants were encountered at our Southern border just last month. The CBP facility in Donna, Texas, was at 729 percent capacity last week. Let me repeat that. That facility was at 729 percent capacity.

And, alarmingly, CBP confirmed that four people were arrested at the border, three of whom were from Yemen, one of whom was from Serbia, and those individuals matched the names on the FBI's Terrorist Screening Database.

So despite my liberal progressive colleagues' claims to the contrary, this surge is directly the result of the Biden administration's decision to halt the border wall construction, to reimplement Obama-era catch-and-release policies, and to cancel President Trump's asylum agreements.

This Chamber should work to address the border crisis going on, Biden's border crisis. We should not pass legislation that encourages and rewards illegal immigration and further incentivizes this crisis, yet that is what H.R. 6, in fact, does. This bill places the interest of those who broke our laws above the interests of those who followed them.

It has no enforcement provisions. It includes loopholes to give green cards to gang members and criminals. It even puts U.S. taxpayers on the hook for grant programs to help illegal immigrants obtain green cards.

Again, H.R. 6 would do absolutely nothing to address President Biden's border security and humanitarian crisis at the Southern border.

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the rule and vote ``no'' on H.R. 6.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to call up H.R. 682, the Reopen Schools Act, to get our kids out from behind screens and back in the classroom.

Madam Speaker, I thank Representative Fischbach for yielding to me.

Madam Speaker, the rule before us today makes in order two pieces of legislation that this Chamber already considered last Congress. I am incredibly disappointed, yet once again, that we are considering legislation that makes it harder for law-abiding citizens to exercise their Second Amendment rights, but does nothing, nothing at all, to address the root cause of gun violence.

Despite what the majority claims, these bills would not have prevented any recent, high-profile mass shootings. These bills would not have prevented criminals from obtaining firearms. The overwhelming majority of criminals who commit crimes or are in possession of a firearm, they commit those crimes with firearms that were acquired through theft, the underground market, or straw purchases; and these are already illegal. Nothing in these bills would stop criminals from continuing to break the law.

Instead, H.R. 8 and H.R. 1446 would make it harder for domestic violence victims to protect themselves. It would give unelected bureaucrats the power to indefinitely delay legal gun purchases. It could even be used to create a national gun registry.

If you don't believe me, the Obama administration even said that universal background checks are unworkable unless you have a national registry. But let's just get back to the text.

As we pointed out last Congress, H.R. 8 is so poorly drafted that a transfer of a firearm to another person during a life-threatening emergency could land somebody in jail. That is how poorly this is drafted. So, again, these bills do nothing except penalize law-abiding citizens.

You know, I learned to shoot from my grandfather. I was very young and learned how to shoot in Westmoreland County, Pennsylvania. Guns and firearms are very important to me and to a lot of my constituents. I can attest and I can assure you that the vast majority of gun owners are hardworking, law-abiding citizens looking to protect their families, looking to hunt and shoot with their friends.

But my colleagues on the left would be wise to just stop their grandstanding and focus on solutions that have been proven to work, like improving law enforcement coordination, increasing information sharing, and giving authorities more resources to actually prevent, deter, and prosecute firearm violence.

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this rule, vote ``no'' on H.R. 8, and vote ``no'' on H.R. 1446.

Mr. Speaker, I thank Ranking Member Cole for yielding me the time.

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 1, which should more appropriately be titled, the for the politicians act, is nothing more than a top-down Federal power grab that nationalizes our elections and empowers the Democratic party to permanently hold on to their majority.

Article I, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution gives States the primary role in establishing election law and in administering elections.

H.R. 1 upends this constitutional balance by forcing States to permanently expand mail-in voting, legalize ballot harvesting, and disregard voter ID laws. Even more alarming, this bill allows for the first-ever Federal funding of campaigns, creating a 6 to 1 government match to small-dollar donors. This means that for every $200 donated, the Federal Government would contribute $1,200. Additionally, certain voters will be given publicly funded vouchers to donate to candidates of their choice.

H.R. 1 also stifles free speech and empowers President Biden's IRS to target conservative organizations and deny them their tax-exempt status.

Last, but certainly not least, H.R. 1 increases vulnerability for foreign election interference at a time when we should be increasingly more vigilant about hostile regimes seeking to undermine our democracy.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the rule and ``no'' on H.R. 1.

Madam Speaker, the payoff to progressives package before us today has little to do with the ongoing pandemic. This bill, which is the most expensive single bill in history, only allocates 9 percent of the $1.9 trillion price tag to actually defeating COVID.

So what are the Democrats spending the rest of the money on?

Corrupt pet projects, of course, and also payoffs to Progressive liberal special interest groups.

Just look at it: $100 million for a Silicon Valley rail project near Speaker Pelosi's district. Totally coincidentally, I am sure. Taxpayer funded healthcare subsidies for illegal immigrants. Fifty million dollars for Planned Parenthood. Hundreds of billions in bailouts to blue State Governors, who crush small businesses with their draconian lockdown measures. And a minimum wage mandate that, right off the bat, would kill 1.4 million American jobs. The list goes on and on.

But do you know what Democrats aren't putting in this bill?

They aren't reopening our schools. In fact, this bill spends 95 percent of the education funding after the school year.

Democrats also aren't reopening our economy with this bill. In fact, this bill spends $471 billion on policies that actually reduce employment.

And they aren't targeting relief to where it is actually needed. In fact, this bill gives checks to individuals who have not lost any income and gives taxpayer-funded healthcare to millionaires.

President Biden and congressional Democrats had a chance to make good on their empty promises to show unity and bipartisanship. They could have worked with Republicans on a targeted relief bill that sends money to where it actually needs to go and effectively spends $1 trillion in the remaining funds that have already been allocated. Instead, they are using this pandemic as pretext to force through a corrupt bill filled with Progressive payoffs.

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on H.R. 1319.

Madam Speaker, I rise to recognize the extraordinary service and sacrifice of the 14th Quartermaster Detachment of the United Slates Army Reserve during Operation Desert Storm. Thirty years ago, on February 25, 1991, an Iraqi-launched SCUD missile killed 28 soldiers and wounded 99 others. The 14th Quartermaster Detachment, based in Greensburg, Pennsylvania, lost 13 soldiers and 43 others were wounded, the greatest number of casualties of any allied unit during the conflict.

In January of 1991, these citizen soldiers from southwestern Pennsylvania deployed overseas and put their civilian lives on hold to defend Kuwait and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia from Saddam Hussein's aggression. Following intense training, the 14th Quartermaster was selected for the critical task of supplying clean water for coalition forces in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia. On February 19, 1991, the detachment arrived in Dhahran, and six days later, 28 of these brave Americans lost their lives, and many others suffered injuries that changed their lives forever. This attack was the deadliest assault on American servicemembers during Operation Desert Storm. Just one in four members of the 14th Quartermaster emerged without mortal or physical wounds from the attack.

Madam Speaker, the brave men and women of the 14th Quartermaster Detachment of the United States Army Reserve are truly exemplary Americans. Thirty years later, the legacy of their extraordinary service lives on in Pennsylvania and across our nation. We can never repay the debt we owe these servicemembers and their families, but we must ensure their sacrifice is never forgotten.

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

I thank the distinguished gentlewoman from my home State of Pennsylvania for yielding me the customary 30 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, the rule before us provides for the consideration of two pieces of legislation. Let's just look at both pieces one at a time.

The first bill, H.R. 5, the Equality Act, provides for civil rights protections for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer individuals.

Let me start by saying that Republicans believe all people should be treated equally under the law. Let me repeat that. Republicans believe all people should be treated equally under the law. But the Equality Act misses that mark.

Rather, H.R. 5 represents a radical departure from existing civil rights protections that will have significant implications on everyday life, and eliminate laws ensuring women and girls have the same opportunities as men and boys.

Just take student athletics. H.R. 5 would redefine sex to include gender identity, meaning a transgender woman, a person who was born genetically male but identifies as a woman, could not be barred from participating in girls' or women's athletics.

Further, I have concerns that, due to the lack of committee action, this bill has not been fully thought out and it may be difficult, frankly, if not impossible, to actually implement in line with congressional intent.

Perhaps the most pressing example of this is the term ``gender identity,'' which is so vague that even the special interest groups backing this bill cannot agree on a single definition of that.

Lastly, I am troubled that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act is not applicable under this measure. Without this vital protection, churches, synagogues, mosques, and religiously affiliated schools will be forced to act contrary to their deeply held beliefs or stop offering certain services to the public.

Religious freedom was once an issue that all Americans, regardless of political party, strongly supported. It is incredibly disappointing to see my colleagues across the aisle abandon this principle in an effort to appease their far-left radical progressive base.

Mr. Speaker, the second part of this rule provides for consideration of H.R. 803, the Protecting America's Wilderness and Public Lands Act. This legislation consists of 8 natural resources bills, and will create nearly 1.5 million acres of wilderness, establish the most restrictive Federal land use classification, as well as lock up rivers and other lands across four western States.

Like all my Republican colleagues, I strongly support responsible preservation of our Nation's natural resources. Remember, it was Republican Teddy Roosevelt who started this movement.

However, my colleagues across the aisle have ignored this and have gone way too far. This bill takes a partisan approach to public land protection, and not a single Republican has cosponsored the underlying measures.

Further, some of the lands affected by this legislation lie in congressional districts where Members of Congress do not support such actions. These Members have not had the opportunity to share their opposition or their concerns, as bills in H.R. 803 were not marked up by this Congress.

H.R. 803 also ignores input from local communities, who voiced concern that these measures will hurt local economies and rural jobs. As we recover from the COVID-19 pandemic, the last thing that we should be doing is eliminating good-paying, family-sustaining jobs.

Further, this bill will actually increase catastrophic wildfires, as the new wilderness and scenic river designations prohibit scientific forest management.

I am especially concerned that this measure withdraws 1.2 million acres from mineral production, including uranium, a necessary component for the U.S. nuclear reactor fleet.

Currently, our Nation is relying on China for the vast majority of rare earth elements and critical materials, which are necessary for everything from building a fighter jet to a cell phone.

Just last week, we saw China threaten to cut off its mineral supply to American defense contractors. We have watched as China has done this to sister democracies such as Japan.

This bill will give the Chinese Communist Party, and other unstable and hostile regimes, control over our energy and mineral needs, putting our economic and national security at risk.

We must not cut off access to the minerals and materials necessary for everyday life and for the protection of our Nation.

I would urge my colleagues across the aisle to seek a bipartisan approach to these two bills, to this rule, not just today, but also in the weeks and months ahead.

Mr. Speaker, I urge opposition to the rule, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Arizona (Mrs. Lesko), my good friend.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Good).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Georgia (Mrs. Greene).

Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 15 seconds to the gentlewoman from Georgia just to close.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from the great State of Texas (Mr. Pfluger).

Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 15 seconds to the gentleman from Pennsylvania.

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

Mr. Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to the rule to immediately consider H.R. 682, the Reopen Schools Act.

I will do this to ensure that the $54.3 billion that Congress appropriated just last month to help schools reopen is, in fact, prioritized to meet the expenses of actually being able to open up schools for in-person learning.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include in the Record the text of my amendment, along with any extraneous material, immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from Iowa (Mrs. Hinson), who will explain the amendment.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Wenstrup), the good doctor.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I have no further speakers and at this time, and I am prepared to close.

Mr. Speaker, Republicans believe everyone should be treated equally under the law. But H.R. 5 is a radical approach that will have serious, unintended consequences for female athletes, victims of sexual violence, houses of worship, and healthcare professionals. The list goes on and on. Critically, the bill undermines important religious freedom protections.

As for H.R. 803, let's call this what it is. It is a land grab. This is a land grab, which will kill jobs in rural communities. It will leave us vulnerable to hostile nations for our energy and mineral needs. It will restrict access and recreation opportunities for the American public.

For all these reasons, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the previous question and ``no'' on the underlying measure.

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

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I am deeply troubled by last week's attack on our Capitol, and I pray for the families of Officer Sicknick and Officer Liebengood.

As I have been saying all summer long, violence and rioting has no place in America. The criminals responsible for last week's rioting must be brought to justice. At a time when our Nation is still healing, we must seek out issues to work on that unite us rather than issues that further divide us.

I was greatly encouraged to see our country unite in condemnation of last week's lawlessness and the rioting. I am further encouraged that, despite my Democrat colleagues' claims to the contrary, President Trump is committed to a peaceful and uninterrupted transfer of power.

But that is not good enough for my colleagues across the aisle. With just 7 days left in President Trump's term, they are fast-tracking impeachment proceedings, a move which will no doubt further divide an already fractured Nation.

Even House Democrats' last impeachment effort, which was rushed through in record time, at the very least, that had expert input, depositions, hearings, and deliberation. This latest attempt at impeachment ignores all precedent. It ignores all due process. It cannot be voted on in the Senate before Joe Biden is sworn into office.

I am also very concerned by the charge against the President of ``incitement of insurrection.'' At his rally, President Trump urged attendees to ``peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.'' There was no mention of violence, let alone calls to action.

Look, I prosecuted terrorists in the Navy. I was a defense attorney in the Navy JAG Corps. I was a district judge. Pull up the criminal statute. Look at the criminal code. President Trump's

words would not even meet the definition of incitement under criminal statutes.

The measure before us today sets a dangerous precedent whereby political parties can justify impeachment simply because they do not agree with the President. I would, therefore, urge my colleagues across the aisle to just take a step back, let cooler heads prevail, and consider how the actions we are taking here today will alter the course of history, will lower an already low bar of impeachment for all future Presidencies.

Madam Speaker, I rise to celebrate the life of Joyce Ellis, who passed away on December 16, 2020, at the age of 62. Ms. Ellis was a remarkable woman with a steadfast commitment to serving her community, and her leadership and advocacy for our region's youth will be greatly missed.

At the age of 17, Ms. Ellis opened her first dance studio, eventually expanding her operation to include four studios throughout southwestern Pennsylvania. Ms. Ellis' students performed across the Commonwealth, from community parades to Steelers and Pirates games. They were also nationally recognized at the Cherry Blossom Festival in our nation's capital.

While Ms. Ellis was an accomplished dancer and choreographer, she was also deeply dedicated to mentorship. Students and parents remember her commitment to ensuring dancers of all skill levels were set up for future success. After receiving an Observer-Reponer Person of the Year award, Ms. Ellis best summed up her approach, ``I really feel I was put on this planet to help people become better, and upon doing so, I become better.''

At the height of her career, Ms. Ellis felt a calling from God to leave her studios and reopen the LeMoyne Community Center in Washington, Pennsylvania, becoming Executive Director in 2007. Under her leadership, the once dilapidated building became a place filled with hope and promise.

Ms. Ellis fiercely believed the LeMoyne Community Center should be a source of stability and comfort for local children. She established a food program to provide meals for youths across Washington County and started Homework and More, a program hosting afterschool activities and tutoring. When school was not in session, the center held summer camp and Coco's Christmas, which sourced clothing, gifts, and meals for families in need.

Madam Speaker, it is with profound sadness that I recognize the loss of Joyce Ellis. Ms. Ellis indelibly advanced and improved her community through the LeMoyne Community Center, and her service will leave a lasting legacy for children and families in our region.

Madam Speaker, I rise to celebrate the life of Pennsylvania State Representative Mike Reese, who passed away on January 2, 2021, at the age of 42. Representative Reese was a loving husband to his wife, Angela, father, mentor, and role model to his children Addison, Michael, and Claire, and friend to many in our region and across the Commonwealth.

A lifelong Pennsylvanian, Representative Reese graduated from Duquesne University and obtained a Master's in Business Administration from Seton Hill University. Prior to his service in the state legislature, Representative Reese taught and served as an administrator at local schools and institutes of higher education in southwestern Pennsylvania. He also held the position of Chief of Staff for former Westmoreland County Commissioners Terry Marolt and Phil Light and assistant director and financial administrator for Westmoreland County.

In 2008, Representative Reese was elected to represent the 59th Legislative District in the Pennsylvania House of Representatives, serving portions of Westmoreland and Somerset Counties. Throughout his service, Representative Reese was a tireless advocate for the people of southwestern Pennsylvania. His hard work and dedication did not go unnoticed, and he held several leadership roles, including Republican Caucus Secretary and Republican Caucus Chairman.

Madam Speaker, it is with profound sadness that I recognize the loss of State Representative Mike Reese. Representative Reese's accomplishments and legacy will leave a lasting impact on the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and he will be greatly missed by his family, friends, and community.

Mr. Speaker, let me be clear about something. The violence and the rioting in our Capitol last Wednesday was tragic. It was undemocratic, and it was unacceptable. I unequivocally condemn this criminal behavior that occurred in this building.

Our great Nation is deeply divided. Unfortunately, rather than looking forward and working together on issues that actually unite our country, we are here debating a partisan issue, a partisan resolution that will only further divide us.

The Constitution is very clear on the issue we are debating. The ability to activate section 4 of the 25th Amendment lies with the Vice President and Cabinet members, Cabinet members who are vetted and confirmed by the Senate.

Congress is only drawn in, House Members are only drawn in, when the President disputes a declaration of incapacitation. That is not what is happening here. We should respect that constitutional prerogative.

Mr. Speaker, I am also perplexed by my Democrat colleagues' attempt to force the hand of a man that they clearly had faith in to run our country. They must recognize that by calling for the President's immediate resignation, they are also advocating for Vice President Mike Pence to lead our Nation. Therefore, they should have full trust in Vice President Pence's decision-making ability to act in a manner consistent with his constitutional responsibilities, just as he did last week.

Further, I am incredibly and deeply disappointed that the rule before us suspends prohibitions on engaging in personalities against the President. It is somewhat ironic. If we are truly worried about rhetoric, then we must set an example and ensure that civility and decorum remain an essential part of the American discourse.

Mr. Speaker, we must set an example and ensure that civility and decorum remain an essential part of the American discourse.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of S. 998, the Senate companion to this bipartisan legislation, that I introduced with Congresswoman Dean, that will address the mental health needs of our Nation's police officers.

Law enforcement officers put their lives on the line every day to protect our communities.

Last year, when the Tree of Life synagogue was under attack, the Pittsburgh police and police from around the region ran into open gunfire to stop a deranged, hateful madman intent on killing as many worshippers as possible. Were it not for the heroic efforts of the police that day, the tragic loss of life could have been much worse.

Across the country, we sleep safely in our beds each night because of our law enforcement officers. But the critical work that these men and women undertake does not come without a cost.

According to the National Study of Police Suicides, law enforcement officers are two-and-a-half times more likely to die from suicides than from homicides. Studies show that police officers have above average stress levels that lead to post-traumatic stress, heart disease, and high blood pressure. Despite all we do for our communities, the Federal Government provides few resources to address the consequences of their taxing work.

The STOIC Act is a bipartisan piece of legislation that will reform and expand an existing grant program to better address the mental health and support needs of our law enforcement, most importantly as it relates to suicide prevention.

I am very grateful to Senator Hawley and Senator Whitehouse for their work to get this bill through the Senate.

I also, again, thank Ranking Member Collins and Chairman Nadler for prioritizing this important piece of legislation.

And, most importantly, I thank my friend and fellow Pennsylvanian, Congresswoman Dean, for her tireless work to improve mental health treatment for police across the country. Throughout this entire process, Congresswoman Dean has shown tremendous appreciation for law enforcement officers and great concern for the well-being of them and their families. It has truly been a pleasure to work on this bill with Congresswoman Dean.

Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to support the STOIC Act today. It is time for us to take care of those who take care of us.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table H.R. 3401, with the Senate amendment thereto, and concur in the Senate amendment. This bipartisan bill passed the Senate with 84 votes and could be sent to the President's desk for his signature today.