Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, the Senate's inability to pass healthcare reform legislation does not change the fact that the Affordable Care Act is failing. Many Americans may not have one insurance provider on the exchange this fall.

Forty percent of counties in the country now only have one option on the exchange. The ACA Medicaid expansion treats nonelderly, nondisabled individuals living above the poverty line more favorably than the elderly and disabled that this crucial program exists to protect.

Seven years ago, President Obama and congressional Democrats ran through an ill-conceived and unsustainable healthcare law that was grounded in make-believe and statements that were just not true. The Supreme Court twisted an unconstitutional individual mandate penalty into a dubiously constitutional tax, not only mocking our Constitution, but facilitating an evasion of responsibility for representatives who imposed an unpopular tax on the American people.

The legacy ObamaCare has been and will continue to be--lost plans, lost doctors, and, as Chelsea Clinton reminded us last year, crushing costs. Single payer is not to the option. Not one Senator voted for single payer yesterday.

The solution to our healthcare problem is more freedom, more choice, less Washington control. We must continue our efforts to save the American people from this failing law, and continue our healthcare reform efforts.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to call on all of my colleagues to support this resolution and the underlying legislation, H.J. Res. 111.

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's antiarbitration rule will cause a great deal of harm to consumers, including consumers who wish to settle a dispute with a firm in a timely and effective fashion, as well as other consumers who will see their options and choices diminished and their costs increased by this rule.

The CFPB's rule will hurt the very people the CFPB claims it is supposed to help by depriving individuals of the efficient and effective process of arbitration. The CFPB itself acknowledged that arbitration is 12 times faster, on average, than class actions.

In today's fast-paced economy, hardworking Americans may want to pursue a quicker option than becoming a party to costly and time- consuming litigation that can take years.

Not only are class actions burdensome in terms of time, but they often produce negligible benefits for the plaintiffs in question. In fact, class actions reviewed in the CFPB study resulted in an average recovery of only

$32 per class member. This is so minuscule that the firms being sued are forced to charge their customers additional fees, which fees may be larger than the initial recovery to cover the costs of the firm's legal fees. This often leaves customers worse off financially than if they had never chosen to settle their dispute.

Contrast this negligible or nonexistent relief and headache it causes consumers with the average $5,300 of relief that consumers obtained through arbitration in the cases that the CFPB reviewed in its own study. Contrast the $32 average individual recovery as well with the average $1 million that plaintiff lawyers make per settled case.

Madam Speaker, consider also the fact that 87 percent of class actions generate no benefits for consumers whatsoever because they are dismissed by the Court or settled with the named plaintiff only.

In addition to the direct harm the CFPB's antiarbitration rule will cause to consumers, it will also have negative effects on a variety of companies and firms that will have to prepare themselves for falling victim to costly litigation. In light of that, they will be unlikely to direct any financial resources toward providing their customers even the option for arbitration.

In addition, many firms are unavailable to survive such costly litigation, meaning they will either go out of business or be forced to stop offering certain products and services.

How will this benefit consumers?

It won't. It will make their purchases costlier and the products and services they need more difficult to find.

If you want to help ensure consumer recoveries and justice--and we all do--depriving them of the most efficient and most remunerative option is not the answer. Sadly, that is precisely what will result from the CFPB's misguided, anticonsumer rule.

The CFPB's antiarbitration rule will close the door to recovery for consumers, but open the door for million-dollar trial attorney's fees. The underlying legislation considered today will reopen the door to consumer recovery.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding and for his leadership on getting this legislation to the floor.

Mr. Speaker, the CFPB's anticonsumer, anti-arbitration, pro-trial lawyer rule is just the latest example of the harm that can be done by an out-of-control, Washington-knows-best bureaucracy. This is a teaching moment for the country about how, when elites in Washington pander to special interests, they end up hurting the very people they claim to be protecting.

We all want fairer outcomes for consumers, but the CFPB's unfair, deceptive, and abusive rule will deprive millions of Americans of a convenient, fast, and effective way to resolve their disputes.

According to the CFPB's own study, only 13 percent of class actions provided a benefit to consumers, and the average payout was--get this-- $32. How is that pro-consumer? The same study, on the other hand, showed that consumers who obtain relief through arbitration recover over $5,300, on average. Again, that is $5,300 in arbitration against $32 through a class action.

Meanwhile, trial lawyers in class actions earn about $1 million, on average. Consider that--$1 million for the plaintiffs' lawyers, a $32 coupon, $32 cash, for a consumer. In other words, trial lawyers stand to earn 31,000 times more than a consumer in a class action.

In arbitration, however, consumers get meaningful relief. Yet the CFPB has finalized a rule that would effectively get rid of arbitration and promote class actions as the preferred dispute resolution process. This hardly seems fair.

The CFPB's anti-arbitration rule is an invitation to trial lawyers to take all they can get. Banks, credit unions, and other businesses that American consumers interact with on a daily basis will be forced to hold greater reserves because of the risk of future costly litigation. This will increase costs for consumers, and it will lead to less access or more expensive financial services for millions of Americans. It could also harm the safety and soundness of the financial system, according to the Comptroller of the Currency, one of the main Federal banking regulators.

The Dodd-Frank Act requires that any move by the CFPB to regulate arbitration agreements needs to be in the public interest and for the protection of consumers. I fail to see how forcing consumers to accept a coupon for their troubles and handing millions of dollars in payouts to trial lawyers meets either of those goals.

Only at the CFPB could endangering local banks and credit unions and restricting consumer access to financial services be cast as a win for the American people. But, again, this is what you get from the least accountable agency in history, an agency with, according to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, massive and unchecked power that is headed by a Director who possesses more unilateral authority than any single commissioner or board member in any other independent agency in the U.S. Government.

It has long been understood that expeditious, fair resolution of disputes is in the public interest and part of the public policy of this country. The CFPB rule we are reviewing today challenges that premise, as did the Dodd-Frank section that spawned this rule. But it is the people, acting through their elected Representatives, who have the final say in this matter.

Mr. Speaker, I introduced H.J. Res. 111 so that Congress can, through the Congressional Review Act, strike down this unfair, deceptive, and abusive rule and push back against an out-of-control agency. I ask my colleagues to support this legislation and stand for consumers, fairness, and the American economy.

Mr. Speaker, every day there are more stories about the Affordable Care Act's, or ObamaCare's, ongoing collapse.

Insurers have been dropping out of the ACA's markets for 3 years now. It is estimated that two out of every five, or 40 percent, of all counties in the country will have only one insurer on the exchanges, and many markets may soon have none at all.

The House passed compromise legislation to provide the American people, especially those in the individual market, with more flexibility and choice and fewer Washington mandates, all while putting Medicaid, a critical safety net program, on a sustainable path.

Critics of this legislation have responded with hyperbolic, irresponsible rhetoric, and no solutions, other than higher taxes, more spending, and more Washington control.

Some ACA defenders are actually calling for a single-payer system, which would result in unbearably high taxes, even tighter grips from Washington, and unsustainable spending. It would destroy innovation, create scarcity, degrade quality, and drive up costs. Even the liberal California legislator seems to have abandoned the single-payer fantasy this week.

Instead of careening toward single payer, let's keep the promises we made to repeal and replace ObamaCare and meet the expectations of those who sent us here.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for kindly yielding and allowing me to take a few minutes to have a little bit of reflection with the American people as we head into the Fourth of July weekend.

Mr. Speaker, despite widespread cynicism from Washington elites and those in the media, the 115th Congress and President Trump have taken meaningful action over the past 6 months to improve the lives of hardworking Americans.

According to a recent analysis, this Congress has been the most productive in the modern era. By June 8, we had passed 158 bills, compared to the 60 bills by the 103rd Congress under Bill Clinton, 67 bills by the 107th Congress under President Bush, and 131 bills by the 111th Congress under President Obama.

President Trump has signed 39 bills into law, including 14 bills passed under the Congressional Review Act, stopping harmful regulations handed down by the previous administration. According to one analysis, repealing these rules could save the economy millions of hours of paperwork, nearly $4 billion in regulatory costs to the Federal agencies, and an astounding $35 billion in regulatory costs for the private sector.

We sent to the President, and he signed, legislation to bring accountability to the Veterans Administration. And the House has acted to stop ObamaCare's job and freedom-crushing mandates, and acted to put a critical safety net program on a sustainable path.

The House also voted to repeal and replace Washington's Financial Control Law, Dodd-Frank, to get capital flowing to our small businesses and to improve choices for consumers.

The past 6 months have been a strong start, and I look forward to the House continuing its work to advance important goals of strengthening our economy and creating jobs.

Celebrating Our Nation's Birthday

Mr. Speaker, every year at this time, our Nation celebrates our birthday. It is the perfect time to reflect on the founding of our country and the principles that made our Nation exceptional.

At the height of the Cold War with the Soviet Union, President Kennedy, in his inaugural address, reflected on our founding principles.

JFK said: ``And yet the same revolutionary beliefs for which our forebears fought are still at issue around the globe--the belief that the rights of man come not from the generosity of the State, but from the hand of God.''

President Kennedy understood the words of our Declaration of Independence: ``We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.''

A little more than 100 years before President Kennedy's inauguration, our 16th President, Abraham Lincoln, defended the Declaration and taught all those around him, as well as future generations, how to revere and embrace unwaveringly the sacred and transcendent truths expressed in this monumental document.

Lincoln said in 1858: ``Now, my countrymen, if you have been taught doctrines conflicting with the great landmarks of the Declaration of Independence, if you have listened to suggestions which would take away from its grandeur, and mutilate the fair symmetry of its proportions; if you have been inclined to believe that all men are not created equal in those inalienable rights enumerated by our chart of liberty, let me entreat you to come back. Think nothing of me, take no thought for the political fate of any man whomsoever, but come back to the truths that are in the Declaration of Independence. You may do anything with me you choose, if you will but heed these sacred principles.''

Today, Mr. Speaker, let us recommit to the principles set forth in our Declaration, that all are endowed by your Creator with certain unalienable rights, among them the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. And let those who have admired the leaders of our country who have reasserted these principles, from Lincoln to Kennedy, join together and continue to fight for the protection of these God- given rights, especially the first right, ``the right to life.''

Mr. Speaker, I thank you for allowing me this opportunity to speak. I thank the gentleman from Iowa for having extended to me this opportunity to share these thoughts with the American people.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I thank him for his long work in this field, not just the last 2 years but, really, a lifetime in this space. I commend him for that work. Also, with mental health issues, he has been helping educate Congress about moving toward solutions.

My colleague has outlined the scope of the national problem we have, and each of us can talk about our respective districts and what has been going on there.

In my district, just over the border from my colleague's, western Pennsylvania has been especially hard hit. In Beaver County, we saw 102 overdose deaths related to opioids in 2016, up from 30 in 2013. In Cambria County, we lost 94 people to overdose deaths in 2016, a startling 62 percent increase from 2015.

The stories just keep coming. A story of the mother who lost her 10th child, her youngest child, to this epidemic, who insisted that the words ``damn heroin'' be put in her son's obituary. Or the couple we learned about before Christmas, who overdosed, and 3 days later their infant died from neglect, all three being found 4 days after that.

Mr. Speaker, it is all hands on deck to address this crisis. We are coming together at the Federal, State, and community level to develop a comprehensive strategy to stop this epidemic and to share best practices at every level. That is what a big part of our Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act, passed last year, was all about--an important first step.

Another asset we have, Mr. Speaker, is the Office of National Drug Control Policy. This week, I led a bipartisan group of my colleagues, in a letter to President Trump requesting that the Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy be re-elevated to a Cabinet- level position.

Since its inception, this Office has played a central and critical role in fighting drug trafficking and drug addiction. Both the Office of National

Drug Control Policy and its Director have played, and should continue to play, a central role in this effort.

The Office was created in 1988 with the Anti-Drug Abuse Act. Its mission is to fight the Nation's drug problem through three areas: prevention, addiction recovery, and enforcement.

The Office's Director, commonly referred to as the ``drug czar,'' was elevated to the Cabinet in 1993 by President Clinton, who wanted to raise the Office's profile in order to coordinate and emphasize legislative efforts on the Hill. More importantly, he wanted to focus and emphasize efforts within the administration for the antidrug efforts of the Department of Justice, the Drug Enforcement Administration, the Department of Education, and the Department of Health and Human Services. The Obama administration removed the Office from the position it had in the Cabinet.

When it comes to drug addiction as well as to the illicit drug trade occurring across our southern border, the challenges have never been greater. This is no time to retreat in our efforts, and it is time to restore the Office of National Drug Control Policy to the Cabinet.

The Office is a very important part of the fight against the opioid epidemic, particularly because it plays a crucial role in coordinating efforts at various levels of government. In addition to the legislation that we are passing here in Congress, the administration has a crucial role to play, as do leaders at the State and local level.

We all want to end this crisis, and this common cause unites us, perhaps more than any other issue, across party and partisan lines.

Again, I thank my colleague from Pennsylvania for giving me this opportunity, and I thank him for his work in this area.

Mr. Speaker, it has been a generation or two since the horrors of communism were routinely on the news and mentioned in our schools: people killed running for freedom from East to West Berlin, the Soviet Union's gulag archipelago designed to crush dissent and the human spirit, and Mao's brutal rule in Red China that killed millions.

This week, a new generation of Americans witnessed the barbarity of the evil of communism. I extend my condolences to the family and friends of Otto Warmbier, whose funeral was held yesterday.

Kim Jung Un and his North Korean thugs may believe Otto's torture and death somehow empowers them. They are wrong. President Reagan foretold that communism will end up on the ash heap of history, and that is where Kim is headed.

But Otto has a different legacy. One of Otto's friends told me his spirit could not be crushed and, unlike the communist thugs of North Korea, Otto's spirit will live on, especially in those who loved him.

Mr. Speaker, North Korea must be held accountable for Otto's death and other transgressions. Last month, the House passed the Korean Interdiction and Modernization of Sanctions Act. The Senate should pass this legislation and get it to the President quickly so we can begin to put maximum pressure on this outlaw regime.

Mr. Speaker, for the past 8 years, we have been stuck in the slowest economic recovery in 70 years. With all the debate about the Financial CHOICE Act today, a simple question gets to the heart of the matter: Do we want to grow again?

I contend, Mr. Speaker, the answer is--the answer has to be a resounding yes. It has to be yes because there is a moral imperative at play. The Financial CHOICE Act is about ending a stagnant status quo that is crushing our economy and opportunity.

Multiple studies show that the Dodd-Frank Act has hindered economic growth. One study estimates that, because of the overregulation we have seen since the 2008 financial crisis, there are 650,000 fewer small businesses than there otherwise would be, which would have provided 6.5 million jobs. That is 6.5 million people not utilizing their God-given talents for the betterment of society. That is 6.5 million people not paying the Social Security, Medicare, and income taxes that we need to fund critical programs.

Some just want to raise taxes on the already-burdened taxpayers. I say, let us get new taxpayers into the game. Having more taxpayers helps us to pay for programs for veterans, education, medical research to find cures for diseases like Alzheimer's and cancer, taxpayers to help fund the national defense.

A couple of weeks ago, I visited a senior center in my district and had some very special conversations. Folks told me about the days when there were lots of jobs in factory towns in western Pennsylvania, and one World War II veteran showed me his Bronze Star.

These individuals are counting on us to allow an economy to grow that will create the taxpayers who can help pay for the critical programs that support them, that pay for their care.

We have a moral obligation, Mr. Speaker, to restore healthy growth to this economy. Today, let us pass the Financial CHOICE Act. Let us move from overregulation to right-sized regulation. Let us unclog the flow of capital to small businesses. Let us unclog consumers' access to credit. Let us lower the cost of financial services for everyday consumers. Let us bring an end to the anti-growth policies of the last 8 years and move into a much brighter, more prosperous future for everyone.

Mr. Chairman, today is a good day. It is yet another day where we turn the page on the antigrowth policies of the last 8 years that have given us the slowest economic recovery in 70 years. I urge my colleagues to vote against the stagnant status quo with a vote for the Financial CHOICE Act.

With all the debate we are hearing, understand this: The heart of this bill is about right regulation, accountability, and growth, restoring healthy, robust growth that will create jobs, lift wages, and, through the creation of new taxpayers, will increase revenues to the Federal Treasury that will help pay for critical programs like Social Security, Medicare, veterans benefits, and national defense.

We have a moral obligation to restore healthy economic growth. The opponents of this bill, the status quo defenders, are seemingly okay with slow growth and fewer opportunities.

Mr. Chairman, take a stand for stronger growth. Take a stand for young people who want more job opportunities. Take a stand for young families who want a new home. Take a stand for seniors and veterans who rely on programs funded through a growing, healthy economy. Take a stand for a better way. Take a stand for a brighter future. Vote for H.R. 10. Vote for the Financial CHOICE Act.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of this rule and the underlying legislation, the Financial CHOICE Act. The acronym CHOICE stands for Creating Hope and Opportunity for Investors, Consumers, and Entrepreneurs. This legislation could be very well entitled the ``Make America Grow Again Act.''

I cannot, Mr. Speaker, understate the importance of economic growth and what that means to this country: jobs, better jobs; wages, higher wages; and revenues, more revenues coming into the Federal Treasury as a result of healthy economic growth that will allow us to pay for the critical programs that people in this country depend on, whether seniors, veterans, infrastructure.

You pay for your government with a healthy growing economy. That is not what we have today. We must grow again, especially as we think of these individuals.

Opponents of this legislation are defending a stagnant status quo. They are defending a status quo that has given us the slowest economy since the Great Depression, a status quo responsible for the loss of 1,400 community banks, a status quo that has a community bank or credit union closing every single day, a status quo that has resulted in the noncreation of 650,000 small businesses--that would mean 6.5 million jobs. Six and a half million people who would be paying taxes, paying Social Security taxes, paying Medicare taxes, allowing us to meet the commitments that we have--a status quo that has eliminated free checking, a status quo that is closing branch office banks in small towns in my district, a status quo that allows unaccountable agencies in this town to continue to have too much power and taking away choices from individuals.

This legislation will end too big to fail and will end too small to succeed. Regardless of who you are or where you come from, you should have access to affordable reliable financial services.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Captain Jon D. Peppetti, who is retiring after 22 years of service to our nation with the Judge Advocate General's Corps in the United States Navy. Captain Peppetti was born in Johnstown, Pennsylvania, grew up primarily in Cresson, Pennsylvania, and attended Bishop Carroll High School in Ebensburg, Pennsylvania. He graduated Phi Beta Kappa from the University of Notre Dame in May 1992. He later earned a J.D. from the University of Pittsburgh School of Law, and an LL.M. in International and Comparative Law from the George Washington University Law School.

In 1995, Captain Peppetti began his dedicated service to our nation as a commissioned officer in the U.S. Navy. During the next 22 years, Captain Peppetti served in a wide variety of roles throughout the United States and overseas. His assignments included Naval Legal Service Office Southeast; Navy Recruiting Command; Amphibious Group Three; Naval Legal Service Office Europe and Southwest Asia; Amphibious Squadron Four deployed onboard USS Wasp (LHD 1); Carrier Strike Group Twelve deployed onboard USS Enterprise (CVN 65); Navy Office of Legislative Affairs; U.S. Naval Forces Southern Command/U.S. Fourth Fleet; and Naval Supply Systems Command. He also served as Deputy Executive Assistant to the Judge Advocate General of the Navy, and as a White House Social Aide in support of the President and First Lady. He concluded his career as Legal Counsel to the Chief of Naval Personnel.

Captain Peppetti's expertise and understanding of the complexities of the law of the sea and the law of armed conflict directly enhanced the ability of the U.S. Navy to fulfill its missions throughout the world. As the U.S. Navy confronted myriad diverse challenges, he delivered sage counsel to senior leaders and warfighters that facilitated our nation's ability to conduct naval operations. His profound knowledge and experience greatly contributed to our national security.

For his outstanding service to our nation, Captain Peppetti earned numerous awards, including the Legion of Merit, Meritorious Service Medal, Navy Commendation Medal, and Navy Achievement Medal.

I commend Captain Peppetti for his commitment to our country and the sacrifices he made on its behalf. On the occasion of his retirement from the U.S. Navy, I thank him and his family for his honorable service to our nation and wish him fair winds and following seas as he concludes a distinguished career.

Mr. Speaker, I have a motion at the desk.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in recognition of the Johnstown Rotary Club's 100th Anniversary.

Since its founding in May 1917, the Johnstown Rotary Club has aided many community organizations such as scouting, child relief agencies, arts and theater organizations, police and fire departments and health and service organizations. It has also sponsored Interact Clubs at local high schools and awarded scholarships to outstanding high school students. In addition to providing dictionaries to every third grader in the Johnstown area, Johnstown Rotarians are also involved in various literacy initiatives such as the One Book, One Community Program.

The Johnstown Rotary Club has also been actively involved in international service initiatives such as supporting clean water projects in developing nations. They have been very involved in hosting high school exchange students from numerous countries including Spain, France, Slovakia, Turkey, Venezuela, Mexico, Ecuador, Argentina, Bolivia, the Dominican Republic and Japan. Since 1968, when Rotary International first took on the challenge of eradicating polio, the Johnstown Rotary Club has participated in various projects, which helped to bring the number of countries experiencing the polio endemic from 122 down to two.

I thank the Johnstown Rotarians for their dedication to improving both the Johnstown community and the international community through their commitment to supporting education, providing clean water, promoting peace, saving mothers and children, growing local economies and fighting disease. Congratulations to the Rotary Club of Johnstown on its 100th Anniversary.

Mr. Speaker, I am listening to this debate and I am hearing a lot of demagoguery and no solutions, no solutions for people who have seen skyrocketing premiums, no solutions for people who have lost their healthcare plans, no solutions for people who have lost their doctors, no solutions for people with preexisting conditions who are subject to the same skyrocketing premiums as everybody else, no solutions for people with preexisting conditions who don't even have an insurer in their exchanges.

I, too, have a preexisting condition. I am a cancer survivor. I am in the individual market. I am seeing the same skyrocketing premiums as everybody else. We are moving legislation today that will not only protect those with preexisting conditions, but will work to bring down premiums.

Importantly, those defending the Affordable Care Act had a goal: single-payer, socialized medicine, and this legislation will stop it.

Vote for this legislation, save our healthcare system, and have a much better result for the American people.

Mr. Speaker, as President Trump and Republicans in Congress work toward finally delivering the American people relief from ObamaCare, it is important to remember how we got here and why we find ourselves in this position today.

We are approaching the fork in the road for health care in our country. We have a choice of two paths, and they lead to very different outcomes.

ObamaCare's regulatory behemoth is collapsing the individual market and is paving the way toward a disastrous result, namely, socialized medicine--and the crowded waiting rooms, scarce access to physicians, and low-quality health care that comes with it, not to mention an unprecedented accumulation of power in Washington, D.C.

This is not conjecture. Barack Obama, Harry Reid, and a whole host of ObamaCare supporters have been completely candid about their ultimate goal of a single-payer healthcare system, which could then seamlessly devolve into socialized medicine.

The time to right our course is now. Republicans are offering the American people a better way, one that fosters choice, lowers healthcare costs, and improves Americans' health outcomes. We have two clear and very distinct options. Let's make the right choice and pull back from the brink of socialized medicine.