Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, words have meaning, and we are coming to the floor regularly to talk about the fiscal issues of our great Nation and to talk about how we should approach these.

I'd appreciate that we have everyone in the body involved in this debate, Mr. Speaker, but I want to drill down just a little bit and take a look at what we have going on out in the media and what we continue to hear from so many who are beginning to participate in this debate.

The President and some of our friends across the aisle love saying they want a clean CR. That sounds really nice. For them, they feel as if it implies that what we want is a dirty or an unclean or an evil CR, and I find their choice of words so very interesting, Mr. Speaker.

What we want is an accountable CR because, when they're saying they want a clean CR, I would encourage my colleagues to realize what they're wanting is the no-obligation loan. They want no strings attached. A ``clean CR'' means give us the money, but don't you dare expect us to be accountable for that money.

Words have meaning. When our colleagues hear that, I would encourage them to just realize that what they're really telling you is that they don't want the accountability, that they don't want the transparency. They do not want the responsibility. As we would say when I was in the State Senate in Tennessee, they don't want outcome-based budgeting; they just want to be able to spin what they can spin.

What we continue to push for is accountability, transparency, being responsible to the taxpayer and being responsible to future generations. We have to do that because the spending is out of control.

We talk a lot about the CR and the lower spending levels that are in that. Those came about because of the Budget Control Act. The fact is that we worked and got a 2 percent across-the-board spending reduction; and for the last 2 years we've been able to get the deficit, the annual spending overage, down a little bit. We were in 2010 and 2011 borrowing $3 billion a day to keep the doors open around here. Today, we're borrowing $2 billion per day to keep the doors open. We need to get to

the point that we're not borrowing a single cent. We need to get to that point. Our goal, for those on the other side who can't figure out what a goal is, our goal is fiscal responsibility, fiscal endurance and sovereignty, preserving freedom, free people and free markets. That is our goal for this Nation and doing it in a responsible way.

I've got a great niece who is due this month, and when Georgia Kati Graham arrives, I don't want her to be looking at a mess of a Federal Government. Right now, her share of the national debt is $53,000. Every newborn who is going to arrive: welcome. With your citizenship, here is what you owe.

That is not responsible. It is why we come to this floor day after day. It is why we continue to say to the Senate, Negotiate with us. Work with us. Sure, let's look at the short-term funding issues, let's look at the long run. How do we preserve this great Nation? How do we get this spending under control? I would offer, Mr. Speaker, we don't do it by going out and borrowing $2 billion a day. We don't do it by having the Fed monetize $75 billion worth of debt each and every month. We do it by saying we don't have a revenue problem; we have a spending problem. And it is time that we put the components of that problem on the table and negotiate our way through it so that we're looking at long-term fiscal health and fiscal solvency, not just for this year or next year, not just for the next decade, but for the next century. Let's put our focus on how we return to certainty, how we return to predictability with our Federal regulatory agencies and our Tax Code.

The time to tackle the problem is now.

Mr. Speaker, you know, words have meaning, and I find it so interesting as I come to the floor this morning that I continue to hear my colleagues talk about a clean CR. Well, for my colleagues and for my constituents, I want to explain what this means.

They want to say no attachments, no further accountabilities, no spending reductions, just give us the money. And I would remind them the levels that we're spending at are due to sequestration. It's the law. It's the law. That's where it's at. By implication, they are saying, what you all want is unclean or evil or dirty.

What we are for, Mr. Speaker, is an accountable, transparent CR, an accountable, transparent process--transparent and fair to hardworking taxpayers, fair to future generations, like my grandsons, my nieces, great-nieces and nephews, who are going to have to pay the bill.

Let's have an accountable spending process.

Mr. Speaker, as we have all heard, we received the news yesterday that our priests and ministers could end up facing government arrest if they attempt to celebrate mass or to openly practice their faiths on a military base during this government shutdown--a shutdown that we did not want, a shutdown that could have been avoided had the President and Senator Reid agreed to negotiate with us.

This is so unfortunate. What we see is no mass, no communion, no confession, no prayer, no faith, no religion. Mr. Speaker, what we have to realize is that religious beliefs predate government. Government should not be able to tell those who are religious whether they can practice their faiths freely regardless of our government-funding situation.

What we are seeking is accountability, transparency, and reducing what the Federal Government spends. Government funding is irrelevant to the religious rights and freedoms that are enshrined in the First Amendment of our Constitution, and some don't get to throw away the Constitution just because they are unwilling to sit down and negotiate and work with us through this process. We are not going to sit here and say, Even if you volunteer to serve the faithful, we are going to deny you.

So I ask you, Mr. Speaker: Will our priests and ministers this weekend--some of them on my post at Fort Campbell in my district--be arrested if they recite a Hail Mary? if they lead in prayer?

I think that it is time for us to pass this legislation to agree that we let our men and women in uniform pray. Let America pray. Government shouldn't arrest anyone because some want to play politics with this situation.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to address my colleagues today. Indeed, being in the middle of a government shutdown is something we did not want, and my colleagues and I on our side of the aisle continue to invite the Senate colleagues and their conferees to sit at the table with us and negotiate. We want to make certain that we work out the issues of our Nation's fiscal health.

We have to remember currently we're borrowing $2 billion, $3 billion a day to keep the doors open. This is something we cannot do. It is not fair. It is not fair to future generations. It is not fair to our children and grandchildren. It is not fair to the small business people who have dreams of building a business, watching that business grow, watching those dreams come true. It is not fair to the future of their families. To our Senate colleagues, we do continue to ask them to join us and to negotiate these issues.

There's a lot that's been said about ObamaCare, and some say, Well, it doesn't have anything to do with the budget. You know what, Mr. Speaker? It has everything to do with the budget because of the amount of growth that is taking place in this program. I think we all remember that originally ObamaCare was to be a health insurance access program. Let's give a pathway for uninsured Americans to have access to health insurance, a laudable goal, something that there was agreement on. Where it ran off the rails, if you will, was in the projections of the cost--far exceeding what anybody thought it would be--when it began to make $600 billion worth of cuts in Medicare, taking money out of Medicare, money that the Federal Government is taking out of wage earners' paychecks and putting it into the pot that says ``ObamaCare'' and using that money to redirect, to stand up the ObamaCare program.

There's a problem with that. There's a problem when there are mandates that are made on our hospitals, on our physicians that are paying them less. There's a problem when there is $819.3 billion of new taxes specifically embedded in the ObamaCare legislation, the law, $819.3 billion worth of new taxes that are going to come out of the paychecks of workers and be put into the ObamaCare pot to implement that law.

The impact is dramatic. Even though the President has given 1,200 waivers and special favors, even though he's chosen to make 19 delays of the program for people and entities that have gone to him and said, Hey, we would like a delay or we would like a waiver--the list goes on and on--it is individuals, like my constituents, who are dealing with the full impact of this.

Here are a couple of the emails that I have received:

Marsha, please stop ObamaCare from happening.

This is a small businessowner in one of my cities:

It was great for me to have insurance through the CoverTN

program for small business. It works great for me and others.

It's affordable. There's no way I can afford ObamaCare. My

insurance cost is going up five times more than what I pay

now. We cannot afford this program.

A small business owner who went to a check-cashing facility, got $400, started a business, and now has five locations, 45 employees, wants to grow this business, and cannot because with a 40-hour workweek, 50 employees, it would cause him to have to shutter the doors of his five locations and do something different for his 45 employees. That is the impact that this law is having on a regular daily basis.

Another constituent with a child with type 1 diabetes, they have utilized their employer's reimbursement account, $5,000 that was there. Now that's going to be limited to $2,500. They are looking at how unaffordable the Affordable Care Act is going to be for them.

The list goes on and on.

Mr. Speaker, I want to begin my remarks with a couple of comments about the budget process. I think my colleagues could be a little bit confused on this.

I will remind my colleagues that it is this body that every single year meets our statutory duty and our constitutional duty to bring forward a budget that funds the operations of the United States of America. We do not miss our deadlines, and this year, we did it. I know that the White House did their Sweet 16 bracket before they did their budget, but we were still pleased to see that they were willing to participate in that process, and we were pleased that our friends in the Senate, for the first time in 5 years, decided they would enter into the budget process.

We were very disappointed, quite frankly, when they said they would not move to the conference table with us until we agreed to a tax increase. That is what they want--an agreement to a tax increase in this kind of economy and with about 8 percent unemployment and with 20 million Americans either un- or underemployed? They want more taxes-- more control over people's lives? We were not willing to do that.

We are continuing to stand and fight for the American people--for responsible government, for getting this budget balanced within the next decade, and for getting this country back on the road to fiscal health.

I will also remind my colleagues that one of the things we continue to hear from this White House and this administration is that they want a government shutdown. Now, they try to blame us--we realize that--but I've got to tell you that I've got a titanium backbone. Let them blame. Let them talk. It's fine. They want a government shutdown. For my colleagues, I would direct their attention to the Congressional Research Service for the summary of what happens in a government shutdown.

For the interest of my colleagues, Mr. Speaker, I will just walk through some of these points.

One of the reasons they want it is that the President wants control of the checkbook. Right now, the U.S. House of Representatives has that control, and we want to keep it. We don't want a government shutdown. We want to keep the government open and keep cutting it. We want to keep the government open so we can delay, defund, repeal, and replace ObamaCare. This budget process of going into a shutdown gives control to the administrative branch.

There is another little tidbit when you read this circular, and it directs you to the 2011 revision of Circular No. A-11. OMB's current instructions would have agency heads use the Department of Justice opinions. I can tell you the American people and a Republican-led House do not want Eric Holder and Barack Obama making the determination of who and what will be open in this Federal Government, what will be funded and what agencies are going to be working. We don't want to give them that responsibility. I know they want that. I know they're trying to get a government shutdown, but I have to tell you that that is not what we want.

What we are for, as I said, is of making certain that we protect the future and the financial solvency of this great Nation. One of the reasons we have worked so diligently on a budget for this body is that we know the cost and the impact that ObamaCare is going to have on the Nation's fiscal health, and we are very concerned about it. We see what is happening in our communities.

I just want to reference some of the correspondence and conversations I am having with my constituents in Tennessee.

Yesterday, I spoke with a gentleman who went to a check cashing store, borrowed $400, started a retail business, now has 45 employees in five locations--a great business. What he is looking at is he can't expand. He can't hire anybody else. He is having to deal with all of the hoops that really weigh this business down, and it is because of ObamaCare.

Mr. Speaker, it's interesting what brings us here to the House floor this Saturday morning as we are looking at a continuing resolution to fund the government and as we are looking at ways to address what is happening with ObamaCare--where 17 percent of our Nation's economy is being nationalized and federalized.

Those are concerns that we are hearing from our constituents. They do not want ObamaCare to be put into action, and they do not want these insurance exchanges to be stood up and put into action. There are a lot of good reasons why.

First of all, they are not ready. That's why we need to delay this for 1 year. Delay it. We know that there are problems with the exchanges. We know that there are problems with all of the interactive technologies. We know that ObamaCare has already missed over half of its deadlines.

Why would you move forward on a program that is not ready for prime time?

Delay, defund, repeal, replace. That is what we need to do with ObamaCare.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of amendment No. 1 to the continuing resolution, the bill that is bringing us to the floor tonight, and how vital it is that we address the funding needs of this Nation and how vital it is that we do it in a manner that is respectful of the American people and of our constituents. One of the things they have repeatedly said is they want to make certain that we delay the onset of ObamaCare, and that is what we are going to do.

Included in the amendment would be the delay of the 20 new taxes of ObamaCare. It would delay the individual mandate and the costly surtax for noncompliance. It would delay the employer mandate, the Medicaid expansions, the new exchanges, and all those subsidies to try to get people to enroll. It would delay the dozens of enforcement powers which ObamaCare gives to the IRS. And it would delay the collection of all your personal information and data by the navigators and those seeking to put this program into effect with these exchanges.

So that is what this amendment would do.

Why are we doing this? Number one, this is a program that is too expensive to afford. We have seen that already it has tripled in cost. From its $860 billion estimate, it is up to $2.6 trillion. We know that it is making $600 billion in cuts to Medicare. We know that it is not ready for prime time. There have been 1,200 waivers given to this program. People that are friends of the administration were seeking to be opted out. And it's not good for the American people.

There have been 19 administrative and Presidential delays of this program. We also have learned that there are missed deadlines. We see the impact that it's having on our hospitals. They're laying off people. Hospital doors are closing. Jobs are being lost. Insurance costs are escalating. They have missed 47 percent of all their deadlines as they have sought to put this into place. And the list goes on and on.

But most important is what we hear from our constituents, what we hear from the American people, and the rate shock that is out there. And among my constituents I have a small business owner who wrote me this week. Her insurance cost is going up five times over what it is right now; a teacher with a husband and two children, 105 percent.

We also have people that are writing in and they're talking about how disappointed they are. They had a plan they liked, but they can't keep it now. One said, ``Our insurance would cost more than what we make. We would be paying our employer $71.50.'' Another said they have lost their insurance. The reason they were given is because of ObamaCare. Discontinued due to ObamaCare. This is what we're hearing from our constituents.

Parents of children, a family, a child, type 1 diabetes. They need those reimbursement accounts. They're being cut in half. They're not able to keep that. For an employer whose employees are seeing their out-of-pocket expense go up, do you know what that amounts to for this family? It's a $7,600 pay cut.

So what we do is come to the floor tonight to say it's not ready. We are seeing the impact of delay after delay that is being done by this administration. And what we are saying is that it is time, as a fairness issue to the American people, to delay the whole thing. Delay it for a year. Continue to work on it. Make certain that we listen to the American people and respond to their wish.

Delay ObamaCare.

Thank you so much, and I thank the gentlelady for her attention on this issue.

Mr. Speaker, I think each of us wants to thank the leadership for allowing us to have time on the House floor and talk directly to the American people in order to be certain that they know exactly what is in this unaffordable act. We have talked a lot about why we want to delay it and defund it and repeal it and replace it, and the importance of that.

As the gentlelady from Minnesota mentioned, one of the problems that we hear from women is--guess what?--the cost of insurance is going up. The President had said it's going to save you $2,500, and we are hearing now that it is going to be going up between $3,000 and $7,500 per family per year for the cost of insurance. When you look at the cost of these exchanges, they're not saving money; it's costing them more.

We are hearing reports of how out-of-pocket expenses are expected to escalate. It may be $5,000 or $6,000 per family. The costs are escalating in what families are going to be using to pay for health care, and because of that, they are looking at us and are saying you have to get the costs down.

There is the impact of ObamaCare on jobs, on the 40-hour workweek, which has been such a cornerstone of the American Dream, such a cornerstone for hardworking families to be able to support their families, to have their children dream big dreams, to educate those children, and to send them forward in the world to do their part in adding to the greatness of America. That is being attacked by this legislation.

It is, indeed, a law that the American people do not want because they can't afford it.

Go back, and remember where we started with this--and this is one thing I hear from women regularly. I had a constituent ask me recently, and it reminded me.

She said, What was the purpose of ObamaCare?

Supposedly, when all of this great debate started, it was to find a pathway for somewhere between 30 and 45 million Americans who did not have access to health insurance to have health insurance. What it has become is a Federalizing and a nationalizing of 17 percent of the U.S. economy. It is turning health care on its head.

In order to pay for it--Mr. Woodall mentioned the hearing that we had in the Budget Committee yesterday--they have taken money out of Medicare, which is money that our seniors have earned. They've earned that money. They have put it into the Medicare trust fund. ObamaCare pulls it out and puts it over here in the ObamaCare pot--$600 billion worth. That money was to be there for seniors, for hardworking taxpayers. This administration picks it up, and they move it over.

They are implementing 20 new taxes. Insurance policies, home sales, equity--you name it--medical devices are all subject to a tax. Why? They've got to find a way to pay for this expensive program that no one can afford. All the while, we continue to stay near 8 percent in unemployment. We have millions of Americans--23 million Americans--who are either unemployed or underemployed, and the Federal Government is seeking to take more of their paychecks.

This is one of the reasons that about 130 of our colleagues, including the gentlelady from Minnesota, have joined me on H.R. 2809, which is the legislation that is the 1-year delay of all things ObamaCare--all the taxes, the fees, the penalties, the Medicaid expansion that our States don't want, the exchanges that are not ready to open. Indeed, on the front page of The Wall Street Journal, there was another article about another glitch in these exchanges. It's not ready for prime time. The smart thing to do is delay it so that we can defund, repeal it, and replace it.

At our Republican Study Committee, we have introduced great replacement language, the American Health Care Reform Act. I know that others who are waiting to speak are going to talk about this act and the ideas we have to give individuals and patients and moms and dads more control over their health care. That's what we want, individuals able to make their own decisions, not a bunch of bureaucrats sitting in a building down on Independence Avenue in Washington, D.C.

We do not trust those decisions to nameless, faceless, unknown, unaccountable bureaucrats. Those decisions should be made by patients and doctors. That is what we are fighting for. We are fighting for the future of this Nation. We are fighting to make certain that our children know the America that we have known: the America that is robust and accepting and is welcoming to those that want to dream big dreams, welcoming to our children's ideas and concepts to build companies, to innovate, to create jobs. That is what we come to the floor to fight for. We know an important component of that is to prevent the establishment of this program that is going to be difficult to get off the books.

Ronald Reagan told us regularly that ``there is nothing so close to eternal life on Earth as a Federal Government program.'' If we have to stand here day and night in order to stop this program, let's stop it.

We continue to invite the President with open hands. We invite him to come and meet with us and work with us. We're willing to work with you. Let's delay this. Let's do things right. Let's not force on the American people, force on top of them a program they have repeatedly said, We do not want it; we do not like it; we want it repealed; we want it replaced.

Will the gentlelady yield?

I think we were all encouraged when we had bipartisan agreement and support for delaying both the employer and the individual mandate, a vote that we took a month earlier this year, and we were encouraged with that.

That's such an interesting thing. There has never been Republican support for this law or the 20,000 pages of regulation that is springing up out of this law because it is costing us jobs, it's costing us money, and it's causing our hospitals to close. And we do have bipartisan agreement that the law is not ready for prime time.

Mr. Speaker, it is sometimes true that behind every great man is a great woman. It is almost always true that behind every great song, great band, great sound, there's a great woman. I rise today to honor several great women of Nashville's renowned music community.

Given yearly, the Source Awards pay respect to the women who add their character, strength, talents, and dreams to the foundation of Music City. Bebe Evans, Bonnie Garner, Debi Fleischer-Robin, Donna Hilley, Gerrie McDowell, Paula Szeigis, and Sarah Trahern are leaders in their industry and are rightfully chosen as this year's 2013 Honorees.

From award-winning bands to award-winning productions to every note that falls in between, Nashville is home to it's own unique sound. I thank all those involved with the Source Awards for offering their time, talents, and treasures to honor the women who make Music City so grand. I ask my colleagues to join with me in celebrating the women whose contributions and life's work strengthen and celebrate that incredible sound.

Mr. Speaker, there's been a lot of talk of delay, defund, repeal, and replace. That's what we're doing when it comes to ObamaCare. Indeed, that's what the American people want. They continue to tell us that they want protections from the harmful impact of ObamaCare and they want to make certain that we keep the Federal Government open.

The House has passed legislation that controls spending, defunds ObamaCare, and prevents a government shutdown. House Republicans are leading the fight to control spending, stop ObamaCare, and protect hardworking Americans. It's time for the Senate to join us.

Here's a great example of the harmful effects of ObamaCare:

In Nashville, Tennessee, a 27-year-old young man who's a nonsmoker currently pays $41 a month for health insurance. Under ObamaCare, guess what? That premium goes to $114 per month. Forty-one dollars versus $114 per month? That's the impact and the effect of ObamaCare.

I thank the gentlelady.

Madam Speaker, I want to commend Mrs. Black, my colleague from Tennessee. She has done a tremendous job in bringing this legislation forward, and she brings it forward because of the experience we have had in Tennessee with a program that was called TennCare, which had no verification. It became ``just in time'' insurance, and guess what? It became too expensive to afford. When you do not exercise appropriate oversight and verification, that is what happens--you incentivize the use. Those who really do not qualify come into the program. Indeed, we had a Governor--a Democrat Governor by the way--who removed about 300,000 individuals from this program.

I am pleased that as we discuss and stand in support of H.R. 2775 that my colleagues across the aisle are getting our message. When it comes to ObamaCare, yes, delay, defund, repeal, replace. That is exactly what we want to do because this law has become so amazingly unpopular with the American people and, indeed, with women. Over 65 percent of all American women oppose this law and the implementation of this law.

The reason we are bringing this legislation forward is that there is a gaping hole. We know that having self-attestation for getting these taxpayer subsidies in these exchanges is going to lead to an incredible amount of fraud. We are even having estimates of as much as $250 billion worth of fraud, which could be going into this program. We're not acting on theory. We're looking at what has previously happened with programs such as TennCare. Indeed, my colleague from New Jersey has heard me talk about this for years, and he knows that when we look at something that is public option health care that that is the public option from which we draw our experience.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor of the South Nashville Little League baseball team. This past week, they became the 2013 Tennessee State Champions, and today they are currently representing Tennessee in Warner-Robbins, Georgia.

The South Nashville Little League team's goal is to provide the youth of Middle Tennessee with a safe, clean, and fun environment in which to learn the fundamentals of baseball, with an emphasis of good sportsmanship and fair play. These skills taught and learned will be useful in many aspects of the lives of these young men, beyond their baseball careers.

We are very proud of these champions, and cheer them on as they represent Tennessee today. Go get 'em!

Mr. Speaker, every community needs a great champion who organizes, leads, and fights to leave an indelible mark. Those champions come in many forms. Some are teachers, some are public servants, and some are dedicated to noble causes. I rise today to honor one such champion, Steven Ryan Palmer, as he retires from 36 years of distinguished service to the American Cancer Society.

Palmer's three decades of service began in South Carolina as a worker in the field level of the American Cancer Society. He went one to hold many leadership positions in the six-state Mid-South Division of the American Cancer Society. His work was instrumental in the success of many ACS initiatives which improved and saved lives in Middle Tennessee.

I ask my colleagues to join with me in honoring the outstanding work and dedication of Ryan Palmer. From the American Cancer Society to Brentwood Baptist Church, Ryan has certainly offered his time, talents, and treasures to his community. Along with his family and friends, I offer my thanks for his service to others.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from West Virginia for his outstanding work on this legislation, and also to Mr. Shimkus, who is the chairman of the subcommittee, for his leadership on the issue.

I do rise today in support of the Coal Residuals Reuse and Management Act of 2013. I am an original cosponsor on that legislation.

Now, I think it comes as no surprise to anybody that this administration has declared their war on coal. You can

listen to the comments that are coming out of the President and his advisers there at the White House. They've done everything in their power to shut down coal plants and to put American coal miners on the unemployment line.

The EPA has targeted everything from existing coal-fired plants to new plants, coal mining operations, and has been looking at labeling coal ash as a hazardous waste since 2010.

Now, unbeknownst to so many individuals and to so many of my constituents is the fact that the same coal ash that has been used safely to make--and get this--bricks, cement, asphalt, plastics, and is used as a filler in wood products is, all of a sudden, a hazardous waste.

I would like the administration to explain to me if coal ash were a hazardous waste when they used TARP funding for shovel-ready projects to repair roads with asphalt containing--guess what--coal ash.

Was coal ash a hazardous waste last winter when it was used in snow and ice control products to keep roads and pedestrians in Chicago safe? Or was coal ash a hazardous waste when it was used to build the EPA's new headquarters?

While I am sure most of my constituents would like to label the EPA's headquarters as a Superfund site, I would say let's support this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentlelady from North Carolina for her excellent work on this measure and all of the work she has done in committee. Dr. Foxx is such a skilled educator. We're pleased to have her in our conference. I know that Chairman Kline, who has really put a lot of effort into this bill, is so pleased to have her.

I do rise to support H.R. 5. This commonsense bill helps parents, teachers, and students. It will help prepare our children to compete in the global workforce. It helps to right the wrongs of our broken education system by bringing back flexibility to the system and encouraging more effective teaching and learning in our schools.

I have to tell you that as a mother and a grandmother, as a classroom volunteer and a homeroom mother for many years, I know how important it is for our children. And the reason that we are bringing this bill forward is because of concern and in preparing every child to compete.

I'm troubled by a recent report that says the U.S. ranked 18th out of 23 industrialized countries in the quality and quantity of high school diplomas. These are all items that need our attention. The feedback we have gotten through the years from No Child Left Behind's one-size- fits-all mandate does not work. People do not want these decisions being made in Washington. The Student Success Act would fix this by repealing the Federal accountability system and restoring much-needed local control. It would also stop the administration's act of coercing States through Race to the Top funds and into adopting specific national academic standards, otherwise known as Common Core. It would put an end to that.

H.R. 5 would reverse the Federal footprint in our education system by repealing the K-12 waiver schemes and the pet programs that have been put in place. This is the right step that we should take for our students for their success and educational opportunities.