Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, although Minnesota is known for hockey, I rise today to recognize the impressive high school wrestling programs in Minnesota's Second District.

This season, Shakopee and Apple Valley continued their strong, outstanding records in wrestling. In fact, Apple Valley held 12 straight State titles until this year, when Shakopee edged them out in the sectionals.

And while Shakopee did not bring home the State title, wrestlers from both Apple Valley and Shakopee put up some extraordinary victories.

Trey Rogers from Hastings finished his season with a perfect record.

Shakopee's Alex Lloyd won his third State championship.

And Apple Valley's Gable Steveson concluded his high school career with a winning percentage of 0.986, the best in State history.

I am proud to have such driven State athletes in my district. Their dedication and hard work will continue to bring them success for years to come, and I look forward to seeing future victories from our Second District wrestlers.

Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Shimkus, as well, for continuing to bring light to the broken promise the Federal Government made to our communities.

The State of Minnesota is home to three nuclear reactors, two of which are at the Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant in my district. Located directly adjacent to the Prairie Island Indian Reservation and the city of Red Wing, the plant has stored spent nuclear fuel on site since the 1970s. While this is done in a very safe and highly secure manner, storage in close proximity to large communities is simply not appropriate.

In 1982, Congress agreed and made it clear that they wanted the Federal Government to oversee and manage the storage of spent fuel. Congress did not want to put the burden and oversight of maintaining safe nuclear storage on our local communities. The Nuclear Waste Policy Act was adopted, and the Federal Government was tasked with creating a national Federal repository for used fuel.

The Federal Government began collecting taxes on all users of nuclear power. In the end, my constituents, businesses, and Americans throughout the country have paid roughly $40 billion in taxes and interest.

In 1995, due to the inaction at the Federal level the plant in my district was forced to take matters into their own hands. While they continued to help fund a repository, they also invested in and began operating a dry cask storage area, a pad on site that could hold up to 48 casks of fuel.

Now, that should have been more than enough to cover their needs until the Federal Government finished their job. Today, Prairie Island is home to 40 casks, with 7 more expected to be filled by 2020.

Thirty-six years after the passage of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act, we still have no repository. Prairie Island now has to go through the process of planning to expand their dry cask facilities in order to accommodate fuel they paid the Federal Government to dispose of.

So I strongly support the efforts of Chairman Shimkus, and that is why I cosponsored the Nuclear Waste Policy Amendments Act of 2017. We owe it to our communities to follow through on our promise to provide a safe place for storage.

Meanwhile, it isn't just our local communities that are impacted by this inaction. When Congress passed a budget last year, I worked to point out that the Federal Government had assumed major liabilities associated with its failure to provide safe and environmentally friendly storage. The GAO recently reported that the Federal Government's environmental liability alone is nearly $450 billion and growing.

At the same time, the funds collected from taxpayers to open a repository have begun being diverted to other payout settlements and judgments based on our broken promise. By the end of fiscal year 2016, $6.1 billion had been paid out, with the Department of Energy estimating another $25 billion to follow.

It is time to keep our promise. Our communities expect it, and the Federal Government cannot afford not to do so. Mr. Speaker, I strongly urge passage of the Nuclear Waste Policy Amendments Act.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to rise today and congratulate a Minnesota landmark and family-run business, Josephson's Clothing Store, on an impressive anniversary. This month Josephson's will celebrate its 140-year anniversary, making it the oldest continually running men's clothing store in the state of Minnesota.

Founder Alfred Josephson opened its doors on January 26, 1878 on Main Street in Red Wing, Minnesota. The Josephson family retained ownership of the store until August 3, 1992 when it was sold by Tom and Marilyn Josephson to its current owners, Tom and Denise Withers. The Withers have proudly operated the store for the last twenty-five years.

Josephson's Clothing Store has a long history that exemplifies Minnesotans' strong work ethic and tenacity. It has withstood economic depressions and recessions, changing demographics, and transitions in commerce preferences. Yet Josephson's remains a staple of the community in Red Wing.

It is my honor to recognize a business that represents the best of American perseverance. I am confident that Josephson's will remain a pillar of the community for years to come.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Indiana (Mr. Rokita) for introducing this very important legislation that restores a simple promise: the sovereign rights of Native Americans will be protected.

For almost 70 years following the passage of the National Labor Relations Act, Tribal sovereignty was upheld and Tribes were given the equal right to self-governance enjoyed by our State and local governments. For the Tribes in my district, sovereignty meant the freedom to advance their own economic development and provide critical government services to their Tribal members.

With the NLRB's San Manuel decision, unelected bureaucrats tossed aside this longstanding precedent and began to assert themselves in Tribal matters on an arbitrary, case-by-case basis. The agency granted itself the right to navigate Tribal law and decide when a Tribal enterprise is for commercial purposes, a requirement that would never be imposed on revenue-generating activities of State and local governments.

As the Federal bureaucracy expands its own power, Tribes face legal confusion and uncertainty, hindering their self-sufficiency and the ability to provide for their members.

The Tribal Labor Sovereignty Act restores the well-established legal standard of Tribal sovereignty. As State and local governments are excluded from the Federal requirements of the NLRA, this bill simply ensures Tribal governments receive equal treatment, not lesser status. It provides our Tribes with needed clarity that, when an enterprise is owned and operated by the Indian Tribe and located on Tribal land, Tribal sovereignty will be protected.

I am proud to be a cosponsor of this bipartisan legislation, and I am glad it was included in this package, which I urge my colleagues to support.

Mr. Speaker, it has only been a few weeks since Congress passed the historic tax reform bill, but I am afraid it has got to be very tough for the opponents and our friends across the aisle because, well, you have to wonder: At some point, don't they tire of being wrong so often?

You might recall some claim before we passed the bill that it would raise taxes on the middle class, yet a majority of Americans will now see a tax decrease. In fact, the average family of four in Minnesota's Second District, which I am proud to represent, will see a tax cut of $3,154.

Then they claim that reducing taxes on businesses would never benefit Americans, but employers have already responded by giving a combined total of $1 billion in bonuses and wage increases to their employees. That equates to over 1 million Americans and counting getting a bonus.

Finally, they said the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act would never jump-start economic growth. Well, now, after two quarters of well over 3 percent growth, approaching 4 percent, it is as if the opponents of the tax reform bill are left telling the American people: Are you going to believe me or your own eyes?

The fact of the matter is our opponents rely on hyperbole, but the facts speak for themselves.

Mr. Speaker, I sincerely hope that our friends on the other side of the aisle will soon get over their obsession with the 2016 election and actually work with the majority on genuine tax reform, genuine healthcare reform, and, of course, Congressman Emmer's good bill from Minnesota, H.R. 3905, which I am proud to stand up and support today, to expand employment opportunities for my home State of Minnesota.

Employers in the mining, energy, infrastructure, and manufacturing industries have been struggling to invest in projects and employees over the last 8 years.

In fact, when a business finally figures out a way to go forward, determining the economic feasibility of a project, and decides to invest, then the Federal Government comes in and changes the rules, forcing them back to square one. Minnesota is all too familiar with this process.

Last-ditch Federal, bureaucratic decisions are costing our citizens thousands of well-paying jobs, our communities tax revenue, and our State educational systems funding, and is costing many Minnesotans their way of life.

Over the past 100 years, Congress has studied and voted on where mining should and should not take place. Minnesota has a proud history of protecting the State's natural beauty, while also encouraging safe mining, providing jobs for our citizens, especially in the northeastern part of the State. That is why they call it the Iron Range.

We now have private companies that are willing to invest in Minnesota, employ our constituents, and grow our communities. And what has the Federal Government done? They put up a road block, without congressional intent or input.

The Federal Government is proposing to unilaterally ban mineral exploration and development on 235,000 acres of land that was meant to provide jobs in our State.

Mr. Speaker, Congressman Emmer's bill does not undo environmental studies, the bill does not fast-track mining, and it doesn't even approve a mine. It is simply a vote to let the State of Minnesota review and approve mining operations, based on each individual's projects, merits, and impacts.

That is why the Laborers' International Union of North America, International Union of Operating Engineers, Associated General Contractors of Minnesota, Jobs for Minnesotans Coalition, North America's Building Trades Union, and United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, to name a few, support the bill.

Congress has always respected what activities should be allowed to occur in the several States. This legislation makes certain the public and the State of Minnesota retain that authority.

That is why I am proud to vote in favor of this rule and eventual passage of the MINER Act that allows Minnesotans more opportunity.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the service of the Jerikovsky brothers of South Saint Paul, Minnesota. These nine brothers, the sons of Jacob and Stephania Jerikovsky, served bravely in the United States' Armed Forces during World War II and the Korean War, all of them returning home safely to their family.

Emil, Nick, Jacob Jr., William, Robert, Earl, Edward, George, and Richard Jerikovsky all have the distinction of being a part of a remarkable feat in U.S. military history. It is unprecedented to have nine siblings from one family serve our country in the United States' Armed Forces, and this feat speaks to their family's patriotism and selflessness.

These nine first generation Americans were all proud members of VFW Post No. 295 in South Saint Paul, Minnesota. The Jerikovsky brothers have made a positive impact on our community, state, and country, and we are fortunate to have such selfless citizens who make sacrifices to protect our freedoms.

I know that the Jerikovsky brothers' legacy of service to country and fellow man will inspire all Minnesotans and Americans.

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the Building a Better America budget. Last month, our country's national debt exceeded $20 trillion. Interest payments under that alone are scheduled to go up to $768 billion per year and will skyrocket to $1 trillion should these artificially low interest rates return to their normal levels.

The debt not only threatens to bankrupt our country, it threatens our children's future and the American Dream.

Now, we can't change the culture of spending in Washington overnight, but this budget puts us on the right path to fiscal sustainability. Our budget balances in 10 years, works to begin paying down the debt, and promotes job growth policies like tax, regulatory, and entitlement reform.

For the first time in decades, this budget resolution finally directs Congress to address mandatory spending, the main driver of these deficits. As this graph shows, if nothing is done to address entitlement programs and our interest payments, mandatory spending will fully eclipse the Federal budget in the next few years.

Now, politicians in Washington have promised to address exploding debt and deficits for years, but now we have the opportunity to actually do it. We cannot solve our debt crisis, however, without economic growth. That is why our budget provides reconciliation instructions for tax reform.

Today we have a Tax Code that is overly complicated, punishes work, rewards special interests, and discourages job creation and investments here in America. The result has been an anemic recovery of only 1 or 2 percent. This stagnation has made it harder for families in Minnesota and all over the United States to realize the American Dream.

That is what this is about. Every time tax reform has been tried in the 1920s, in the 1960s, in the 1980s, it has worked to make America globally competitive by encouraging private sector investment that is more productive.

That is why today I urge my colleagues to support this budget, tax reform, economic growth, and fiscal sanity.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Georgia for yielding.

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in opposition to the Congressional Black Caucus substitute budget if for no other reason that there is a price on work, savings, and investment. When you raise that price too high, guess what you get? You get less work, savings, and investment, and you get less economic growth.

Look at the growth rates we have had over the last 10 years under astronomical debt and deficits. If spending could create an economic juggernaut, we would have one now. But instead, we have got 1.5 percent growth, 1.9 percent growth, and 2 percent growth--nowhere near what the prospending lobby would suggest.

Yet, if you look at the 1920s, if you look at the 1960s, and if you look at the 1980s--remember JFK in that famous Economic Club of New York speech said that the surest way to raise revenues is to cut tax rates now.

It worked then, it worked in the 1920s, and it will work right now as it did in the 1980s as well.

The reason is simple. The reason is very simple. Once you lower the price of work, savings, and investment, you not only get more of that, but you leave more capital in the private sector where it is put to use.

When you have capital put to use in the private sector, workers become more productive, and they earn more. I have always said the truck driver is much more productive with the truck, and the people who have the capital that can buy the truck is what makes the economy go.

We don't have a revenue problem in this country. Last year, we had record tax revenues: $3.26 trillion, yet a deficit of $587 billion. We have a spending problem, and the CBC budget increases spending above the CBO baseline over 10 years, while our budget is underneath the CBO baseline for 10 years. Our budget cuts taxes across the board including eliminating the bottom rate that we suggest in our tax reform plan.

This is a question of American vision and the American Dream. Our vision is for more capital in the private sector, more incentives to work, savings, and investment, and more people with rising incomes. Their vision is to protect the government budget.

Mr. Chairman, so I stand in opposition to this particular substitute budget.

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. Chairman, our Nation is facing a skills gap, a student completion crisis at both the high school and college levels, and record levels of student debt. The status quo is unacceptable. We must do better for our students by truly supporting career and technical education as a pathway to success.

CTE has been shown to dramatically increase high school graduation rates, increase postsecondary access, and, most importantly, get students to a degree and a well paying career. More than 75 percent of CTE concentrators pursued postsecondary education shortly after high school, and four out of five students earned a credential or were enrolled 2 years later.

Dual enrollment allows high school CTE students to earn college credit and significantly increase their likelihood of pursuing and completing college, all the while saving their families money.

The key is that CTE students often don't need an extensive 4-year education, as many attend a great 2-year technical college and then head right into the workplace with little debt and skills to excel.

We must fight this narrative--one some of my colleagues are still pushing--that a 2-year technical degree is a lesser educational option. This way of thinking is simply harmful to our Nation's students and our Nation.

My amendment increases funding for CTE State grants by $70 million, transferring the funding from an increase to TRIO and GEAR UP. It does not cut funding to TRIO and GEAR UP but continues funding these programs at fiscal year 2017 levels, the highest funding levels in program history.

The TRIO and GEAR UP programs received significant funding increases over the past decade, including a $50 million increase in 2017, leaving the programs with proposed funding $230 million above their 2007 level.

Instead of an increase for TRIO and GEAR UP this next fiscal year, my amendment makes an overdue investment in career and technical education and in our Nation's students.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Mitchell).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Grothman).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Ms. Foxx).

Mr. Chairman, it is unfortunate to see some of my colleagues claim that career and technical education is somehow the separate or lesser pathway to a 4-year college degree. These claims are neither factual nor are they very genuine. CTE promotes college access, with 91 percent of high school graduates who earn a 2- to 3- year CTE credit going on to enroll in college.

When partisan politics gets injected into workforce development policy, it is students across the Nation who lose. I can tell you that, throughout the Second District, I have employers and students dying for these opportunities from all backgrounds.

The current bill leaves CTE State grants with funding $60 million below

what they received 10 years ago, while TRIO receives funding $110 million above both its authorized level and what the program received just 2 years ago.

My amendment supports all of our students and their diverse ambitions and affirms career and technical education as a viable pathway to success.

Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. Our students are waiting for it, our employers are waiting for it, and our country is waiting for it.

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

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Speaker, I thank Mr. Thompson for his leadership and hard work on this important legislation.

Too often, students across the country leave school without the necessary skills to compete in the modern economy. As the cost of a 4- year degree continues to soar higher and higher and students are taking on greater debt, employers across this country are struggling to find skilled workers to fill good, high-paying jobs. Career and technical education bridges the gap between the classroom and the workplace, offering students a clear pathway to a meaningful career.

I am pleased this legislation includes my amendment supporting dual and concurrent enrollment. By allowing high school students to begin earning postsecondary credit, dual enrollment can shorten the time to degree or credential completion, puts students on the fast tack to a good job, and saves families a significant amount of money. Students who participate in dual enrollment are more likely to continue and pursue postsecondary education, less likely to need remediation, and more likely to complete a degree.

My district is lucky to be home to a great technical college that does its job. For example, in Rosemount, Minnesota, Dakota County Technical College partners with local employers to provide students customized training that fits employer-specific needs.

I am proud to support this important legislation that will increase opportunity and prepare students with the skills to succeed.

Mr. Speaker, on June 13, 2017, during Roll Call Vote No. 306 on the passage of H.R. 2581, the Verify First Act, I was recorded as not voting. Although I was present on the floor at the time, my vote was misreported, and I fully intended to vote ``Yes'' on Roll Call Vote No. 306.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 1809) to reauthorize and improve the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 1809.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 1809, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, more than one million kids are currently involved in the juvenile justice system, a startling fact that carries devastating consequences. Kids who have been incarcerated are 26 percent less likely to graduate from high school, and up to 26 percent more likely to return to jail as adults.

There are many kids experiencing grim and challenging circumstances. As a result, some make bad decisions with costly consequences. The reality is we don't live in a perfect society, and sometimes mistakes are made. But regardless of the circumstances surrounding a bad decision, every kid deserves the opportunity of a better path forward. That is why we are here today, to help State and local leaders provide kids with that better path forward.

In 1974, the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act was signed into law with the goal of helping State and local leaders improve their juvenile justice systems. These systems can play an important role in helping young people turn their lives around and gain the skills they need to be successful.

Unfortunately, it has been 15 years since the Federal law aimed at supporting State and local juvenile justice systems has been reformed. We must update this law to develop more effective support services for vulnerable youth and to equip State and local leaders with the tools they need.

I, along with my colleague across the aisle, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott), have put forward the Juvenile Justice Reform Act of 2017, a bipartisan bill that helps set kids up for long-term success.

The reforms in this bill will provide local communities the flexibility they need to help at-risk youth turn their lives around and improve public safety. H.R. 1809 prioritizes what works by using evidence-based strategies and current reliable data to help reduce juvenile delinquency.

By strengthening the core protections for youth in the justice system, this bill makes sensible reforms to enhance their safety and keep more kids from being unnecessarily incarcerated. The bill also improves accountability and enhances the oversight of taxpayer dollars to ensure they are being used responsibly. Perhaps most importantly, this bill improves support for prevention services, especially among at-risk youth.

There is no doubt we want to help kids get their lives back on track. But it is also important to do everything we can to ensure more kids don't experience the same pitfalls.

H.R. 1809 is a strong bipartisan bill that will improve the lives of many young Americans, enabling them to get their lives back on track and achieve success.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the Juvenile Justice Reform Act of 2017.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Mitchell).

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Curbelo).

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

Ensuring kids experiencing difficult life circumstances avoid a life of crime is a collaborative effort. I find it a privilege to stand with parents, teachers, and law enforcement officers to ensure at-risk youth are able to get back on track and grow into productive members of society.

The Juvenile Justice Reform Act of 2017 makes commonsense reforms that move us in a positive direction by providing support to kids who need help the most. I am pleased to help lead this bipartisan effort.

I thank my colleague, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott) for the work he has done on this legislation.

By working together here in Congress, we can ensure young people have the opportunities they need to turn their lives around and earn a lifetime of success. I thank my colleagues for their support of H.R. 1809.

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

Madam Speaker, I, too, am honored to join my colleagues here tonight to recognize the bravery and the sacrifice of those who serve in our military. I also want to thank General Bergman for his years of dedicated service and for his leadership tonight.

While May is Military Appreciation Month, it is important that every month we continue to recognize those who are fighting and still putting their lives on the line each and every day. Since the founding of our country, there have always been brave men and

women who understood what it takes to protect our freedom and our way of life. They are patriots who represent the very best of America.

I am especially grateful to the members of my family who served. My father, James, served in the Army during World War II; and my two brothers, Rick in the Navy and Reg in the Marines, served during Vietnam. Like many of us, I recall seeing my older brothers go off to war in Vietnam, and I vividly remember the difference between the Blue Star and, tragically, Gold Star families during that conflict.

Throughout our Nation's history, we have paid a heavy price for freedom. It has not been easy. One week from today, we will remember those who made the ultimate sacrifice for our country. On Memorial Day, we remember those who gave their lives in the service of these United States. Our fallen soldiers were born in different generations, fought in different wars, faced unique challenges, but they are all part of the fabric and history of this great land, America.

Through their service and selflessness, our Nation's sons and daughters have kept our country strong and free. Thank you to the fallen. Thank you to the veterans and those currently serving here and abroad. God bless America.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (S. 496) to repeal the rule issued by the Federal Highway Administration and the Federal Transit Administration entitled ``Metropolitan Planning Organization Coordination and Planning Area Reform''.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials on S. 496.

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

Mr. Speaker, let me begin by thanking my colleague across the aisle, Representative Lipinski, for his work on the original House version of this legislation and to Senator Duckworth for introducing the corresponding language in the Senate. We all understood the unintended ramifications that this last-minute rule created, and we worked together to address this issue.

This bill rescinds the Federal Highway Administration and Federal Transit Administration's Metropolitan Planning Organization Coordination and Planning Reform rule that was promulgated in December, 2016.

After being sworn in to the House of Representatives, one of the first pieces of legislation I offered was to repeal this rule. Through the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, we were able to work in a bipartisan manner to achieve that goal, and I was proud to serve as the lead Republican in advancing a commonsense policy unanimously through our committee.

This flawed rule mandates the expansion of boundaries for federally required Metropolitan Planning Organizations, or MPOs. There are 409 MPOs in the United States, and the Department of Transportation identified that more than one-third of these MPOs would immediately be subject to the new requirements of this rule.

By requiring that MPO boundaries encompass the entire urbanized area and any surrounding areas that may be urbanized within 20 years, the Department of Transportation has taken away the ability for States and localities to determine how to plan their transportation networks. In many cases, this rule pushes an MPO into the boundary of another MPO, forcing consolidation of areas that are represented by different governing bodies. These areas are not capped and could become extremely expansive. There are even instances where MPOs would be mandated to include cities and counties in neighboring States.

The question is: Why did the DOT feel the need to institute this rule? States already have the ability to reassess their MPO boundaries. MPOs have the ability to expand beyond their boundaries by using memorandums of understanding. Minnesota uses several for transportation planning. Additionally, every 4 years, MPOs are required to participate in a review process that identifies areas of concern like the planning of projects with neighboring areas.

Meanwhile, in the instances of unelected MPOs, like Minnesota's Metropolitan Council, this rule encourages them to expand without any participation or control from local citizens. The MPO council representing the Twin Cities area is entirely appointed by the Governor. Through State statute, they have the ability to levy taxes, and, like all MPOs, they determine what transportation projects to pursue. An expansion of MPO boundaries could mean a new tax for surrounding counties to fund transportation projects that do not address their local needs.

Mr. Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to support this measure and return current law to what Congress intended when it passed the FAST Act. This bill ensures that States, cities, and counties retain decisionmaking ability when it comes to planning their development and transportation growth.

Our language restores certainty to local officials already in planning phases for local projects and could save MPOs more than $340 million over the next several years conforming to the regulation. The essence of this bill is local control. The more government is removed from the people, the less responsive it becomes. Self-governance works best when closest to home.

I want to thank Chairman Shuster for his leadership on this matter, as well as my colleagues, Representative Lipinski and Senator Duckworth, for their work on this bill, and I encourage all my colleagues to support our bill.

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a letter from the National Association of Regional Councils and the Association of Metropolitan Planning Organizations, and a letter from the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.

National Association of Regional Councils and Association

of Metropolitan Planning Organizations,

April 25, 2017.

Dear Member of Congress: On behalf of the members of the

Association of Metropolitan Planning Organizations (AMPO) and

National Association of Regional Councils (NARC), we wish to

express our strong support for a bill expected on the floor

later today: S. 496--``To repeal the rule issued by the

Federal Highway Administration and the Federal Transit

Administration entitled ``Metropolitan Planning Organization

Coordination and Planning Area Reform''. This legislation

passed the Senate unanimously on March 8. Identical

legislation from Representatives Daniel Lipinski and Jason

Lewis, H.R. 1346, has the support of 26 bipartisan co-

sponsors and passed the Transportation and Infrastructure

Committee by voice vote on March 29.

AMPO and NARC support increased planning coordination at

all levels, but this Final Rule has significant drawbacks

that make its implementation impractical, and would hinder

the regional planning process and delay project

implementation. Our extensive joint comments to the federal

docket explain in significant detail the problems with this

rule and the negative consequences we believe would result.

Ours was one of more than 600 comments to the docket that

asked this rule be withdrawn or substantially modified.

Neither occurred, so legislative action is required.

Repeal of this Final Rule is a key priority for our

organizations and for many of our members. The legislation

you will consider today would immediately restore certainty

to the planning process for hundreds of planning

organizations. Its bipartisan support is an indication that

members from both parties recognize the damage this Final

Rule could inflict on the transportation planning process and

project implementation.

We thank you for your consideration of this matter, and

reaffirm our request that you support passage of S. 496.

Sincerely,

Leslie Wollack,

Executive Director, National Association of Regional

Councils.

DeLania Hardy,

Executive Director, Association of Metropolitan Planning

Organizations.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this important legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the American Health Care Act, and I ask the other side: Just what is it you are trying to preserve by voting ``no?''

Premiums rising double digits for years for the last 7 years? In my home State of Minnesota, back-to-back premium increases of 50 to 67 percent?

Young, healthy people being priced out of the insurance market, 8 million in 2014, choosing to pay the penalty instead of buying insurance?

That is the genesis of the death spiral in the insurance markets. That is what this bill is trying to correct.

Deductibles, copays--I had a deductible on my own individual policy, a skyrocketing deductible. There are deductibles of $13,000. That is not health care. That is not even access.

Drug formularies being tightened to save money, so people are denied prescription drugs, a prescription drug tax; thousands of Minnesotans losing their plans, 100,000 when a big insurer dropped out; 1,000 counties with one insurer--that is what you are trying to preserve on the other side, people voting ``no'' on this bill?

Emergency State legislation trying to prop up MNsure in my home State because it is failing, and $1 trillion in taxes and spending that is bankrupting the country--that is what the other side is trying to preserve.

Those voting ``no'' on this bill, we have a choice today. You can embrace the status quo and see the markets spiral out of control completely, or you can vote for change and do the right thing.